On Thu, 2008-10-16 at 15:02 +1300, Richard O'Keefe wrote: > On 16 Oct 2008, at 12:09 pm, Jonathan Cast wrote: > >> I am not sure how say in a Java language a constructor can "conjure > >> up > >> a value of an unknown type". > > > > Well, that's the point. It can't, in Haskell or in Java. If you > > understand that --- that you can't call the default constructor of a > > class that is not statically known at compile time > > If you understand that about Java, then you don't understand Java.
God, I hope never to understand Java. *shudder* > Java reflection means that compile-time types are backed up by > runtime objects belonging to Type in general, to Class if they > are class types. It also means that you can discover the > default constructor by using aClass.getConstructor(), and you > can invoke it by using .newInstance(). Wait, what? Why can't Java use this to keep template parameters around at run time? Or is the article (as per which Set<Integer> and Set<Double> are identical at run time) full of it? jcc _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
