On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Cédric Beust ♔ <ced...@beust.com> wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Josh Berry <tae...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I could be wrong, but I think an underlying point Kevin was making was >> that there is no compiler support outside of implicits for the >> collections in scala. That is, if you had a use case that was similar >> to this in code you were writing, you too could take advantage of it. >> Since Fantom doesn't even let you write generic classes, I'm guessing >> they special case their collections in the compiler. > > Yes, they most likely do. Don't focus on Fantom, I picked it because it's > the fastest I can write an example with. I'm looking forward to writing this > in Kotlin (with reified generics, no less).
Apologies, I had meant to say that I wouldn't be shocked if the other languages also special case the compiler for their collections. Kotlin goes so far as to make the contains method "break" variance rules. That sounds like special casing as well. In fact, it seems like all of the "easier" ways are really just doing the work in the compiler such that others can not do the same tricks. :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to javaposse@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
