On 06/09/2011 04:36 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter wrote:
I accept this analysis as written. I do however have a few
questions/comments.
* This seems like it only affects cases where you have primitives
butting up against a varargs Object..., correct? Only in those cases
do you have a method invocation conversion from a type that does not
subclass Object. Edge-casey.
* It is unexpected, albeit correct according to specification. A few
reasons:
** The int => Object conversion is via Integer, which *is* a subtype
relationship. I know the spec does not provide for reevaluating
specificity after a method invocation conversion...but perhaps it should.
int => Object is a not a subtyping conversion, remember that
subtype as defined by Liskov is a relation between objects.
int is not an object type in Java.
** int *is* more specific than Object from a programmer/development
perspective. Another way of looking at specificity would be "fewer
combinations of argument types apply". That's clearly the case here.
more specific means is the a most specific subtype, so int is not more
specific than Object here
because there is not subtype/supertype relation between int and Object
in Java.
I suspect I won't be the only one to run into this new behavior. As it
stands, the methods in question in JRuby no longer need the varargs
forms, so I'm removing them.
- Charlie
cheers,
Rémi
--
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.
