The case we're looking at is int vs. int-as-Object-by-way-of-Integer. The int/Integer conversation hasn't factored in here at all, unless you can show how Charlie's reading somehow pulls in the stuff.
~~ Robert. On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Neal Gafter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Attila Szegedi <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The question however is whether these solutions we perceive as intuitive >>> can indeed be formally valid under some set of consistent rules, without >>> running into a contradiction. >> >> In answer to you and Neal, it seems there's a simple way to improve the >> spec to provide the "intuitive" result (or at least the result most people >> here seem to find intuitive: treat primitives as more specific than Object >> (and potentially over boxed numeric types as well). My (mis)interpretation >> of the Java spec for Mirah's compiler works this way currently; primitives >> are given priority over reference types unconditionally, since the >> alternative *requires* a boxing conversion. If you have to walk through a >> conversion to get there, you're walking into a less-specific signature. > > The "old" javac algorithm treated boxing and unboxing conversions > symmetrically. But you cannot have both int more specific than Integer and > vice versa. > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
