Brian ask me to make it its own thread. so is V? what we need, because i believe we have been a little over our own head on this and loose the sight of what we need for V?.
we need V? - to represent the L variation of a Q type. - to interact with generics that are not reified. V? does that but does far more, V? is a super type of V which is dangerous, because people will use it as parameter of function instead of V because it's a super type and works with null. Here we are back to a world were every value types may be null. I believe that the issue is that V? should work as a box and currently V? is to powerful/useful as a box so people will start to use it as a true type. - V? should not be a supertype of V - you should not be able to call methods or fields on V? (constructor are still allowed), again it should be a box, so the automatic conversions from/to V/V? are fine, but not more. the moto for V? should be works like an Integer (not more). Rémi
