Thanks, that's kind of what I expected. @Tim:
I found some stuff in there (and in the very helpful Types section), but never saw explicitly whether a collection of unparametrized parametric type offered any additional benefit to the compiler than one of just abstract type. (i.e. Rational[] vs Real[]). Since the container type isn't concrete, I figured it probably wouldn't offer any benefit, but thought I'd ask. - Jim On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Tim Holy <tim.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > James, in case you haven't seen it, this is treated _extensively_ in the > FAQ. > Make a nice cup of tea and pull up a comfy chair before you start reading > :-). > > --Tim > > On Sunday, February 01, 2015 01:16:19 AM Jutho wrote: > > As long as not all parameters of a parametric concrete type are fully > > specified, the type is treated as abstract. So in both cases your > > collection would be of abstract elements and they would not be stored > > packed in memory. I don't think what you are requesting is possible, but > I > > might be mistaken. If the elements of the collection are of a concrete > > type, then applying a function to them should always be the same > function. > > If this were not the case, then type inference could not work. > >
