On Sat, May 9, 2009 at 11:06 AM, Robert Fischer <[email protected]> wrote: > > John Cowan wrote: >>> Depending on your schema of call types, you'll want to choose between >>> grouping call types on interface types vs. one call type per interface >>> type. >> >> Since the arguments and returns are all Object, I think all I need is >> one class per arity: Function0, Function1, Function2, ... FunctionN, >> which last takes an Object[] of arguments. >> > > I'd recommend having a Function<ARG_T extends ArgumentType> and abstract away > the argument typing.
The language is dynamically typed, so Object really is all there is. > > ~~ Robert Fischer. > Grails Training http://GroovyMag.com/training > Smokejumper Consulting http://SmokejumperIT.com > Enfranchised Mind Blog http://EnfranchisedMind.com/blog > > Check out my book, "Grails Persistence with GORM and GSQL"! > http://www.smokejumperit.com/redirect.html > > > > -- GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine at http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
