> Because arrays have identity (not to mention potentially large copying costs), there is simply no reasonable conversion we can define; any "conversion" would involve copying all the data, changing identity, or both. Just as with the array subtyping requirements (Point[] <: Point.ref [] <: Object[]), these are things only the VM can do for us.
I suspected that this was likely due to the large cost of converting between `[I` and `[java/lang/Integer$val`. However, I am still a little unclear as to what the motivation is for this. Is this solely for specialized generics? In Dan's examples with `I` and `java/lang/Integer$val`, the only places where conversions are needed are when primitives are used as type parameters or to call instance methods on them, both of which can already be done with primitive arrays. So in the LW3 - LW20 timeframe would we have any need for these conversions? If so, could you provide some examples? In the case of specialized generics, is the intention that `[I` (and I suppose `I` as well) will appear in generic code?
