Parameterizing the getter is definitely a valid option - possibly better than
returning List<Object>, since it may help catch more errors at compile time.
G
On Jan 24, 2011, at 5:07 PM, calathus wrote:
> In order to avoid this compiler error issue, we may choose an approach to use
> generic type for method level.
> see the following code. Although from type safety perspective, there are
> quite strange things involved here..
> Originally I considered to use super(e.g, <? super I>) for anonymous type,
> but looks like Java does support this syntax in quite restricted place.
>
>
> ----------------
>
> public class Main {
>
> static class A {
> List<?> ts;
> public List<?> getList() {
> return ts;
> }
> public void setList(List<?> ts) {
> this.ts = ts;
> }
> }
> interface I {
> String getName();
> }
> static class B {
> List<? extends I> ts;
> public <T> List<T> getList() {
> return (List<T>)ts;
> }
> public void setList(List<? extends I> ts) {
> this.ts = ts;
> }
> }
>
> class J implements I {
> String name;
> public String getName() {
> return name;
> }
> public void setName(String name) {
> this.name = name;
> }
> }
>
> public static void main(String[] args) {
> {
> A a = new A();
> a.setList(new ArrayList<Integer>());
> List<Object> list = (List<Object>)a.getList();
> //List<Object> list = a.getList(); // error
> }
> {
> B b = new B();
> b.setList(new ArrayList<J>());
> List<I> list1 = b.getList();
> List<J> list2 = b.getList();
> List<Object> list3 = b.getList(); // OK
> b.getList().add(new Integer(4));
> }
> }
>
> }
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 12:45 PM, Greg Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Another thought, ListView should not implement List interface? basically
> > a ListView/TableView are lists with an extra graphics support.
>
> No, ListView and TableView are views on the model data provided by a List.
>
> G
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> calathus
>
>
>
