What point _were_ you making then?
Maybe you should consider figuring that out *before* clicking reply.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java
Posse" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/Hzu3d
> Using trickery I can make a List with nulls in it, and then write
>>> return thisHackedList.get(0), which means in practice that Nothing needs
>>> type checking (i.e. that would lead to a ClassCastException or similar,
>>> even if .get(0) returns null).
>>>
>> Is this just theorizing? I'd lo
On 21 October 2012 23:48, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:42:11 PM UTC+2, Simon Ochsenreither wrote:
>
>>
>> Unfortunately, introducing this kind of concept is exactly the kind of
>>> thing java does NOT do, and languages like Scala DO do: it's not a matter
>>> of super
On Monday, October 22, 2012 1:25:54 AM UTC+2, Simon Ochsenreither wrote:
>
>
> that's false; a List[String] can happen to be empty.
>>
> List[String] is a supertype of List[Nothing], just like Object. That's
> surely not the point I was trying to make.
>
What point _were_ you making then?
-
> that's false; a List[String] can happen to be empty.
>
List[String] is a supertype of List[Nothing], just like Object. That's
surely not the point I was trying to make.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java
Posse" group.
To view this discussion
On 22 October 2012 00:05, Reinier Zwitserloot wrote:
>
>
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:55:49 PM UTC+2, Simon Ochsenreither wrote:
>>
>>
>> One annoyance in Scala is when it infers a type to be, say,
>>> List[Nothing], which so far has never been what I intended.
>>>
>> While I remember some “in
On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:55:49 PM UTC+2, Simon Ochsenreither wrote:
>
>
> One annoyance in Scala is when it infers a type to be, say, List[Nothing],
>> which so far has never been what I intended.
>>
> While I remember some “interesting” type inference results, List[Nothing]
> is a bad exa
On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:47:55 PM UTC+2, Casper Bang wrote:
> Yes, java has no type that represents "there is no value that is this
>> type, not even 'null'". It would be cool if this type existed; a method
>> that had this as return type cannot actually return, ever. It has to exit
>> abn
On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:42:11 PM UTC+2, Simon Ochsenreither wrote:
>
> Unfortunately, introducing this kind of concept is exactly the kind of
>> thing java does NOT do, and languages like Scala DO do: it's not a matter
>> of superiority, it's a matter of tradeoffs: If this Nothing exists,
Hello,
I see a lot of java UI on desktop.
1.) Eclipse IDE. Many java/g++ developers use it.
2.) Eclipse RCP. That's really huge. A lot of traders use SWT based app as
Frontend. Delta 1, BNP.
alexander
On Friday, October 19, 2012 9:09:54 PM UTC+2, fabrizio.giudici wrote:
>
> In this mailing lis
Hi
Hopefully it will be starting around much earlier than this year. Say
February, because I heard there was no snow on the ground.
On Saturday, 6 October 2012 12:29:37 UTC+1, Romain PELISSE wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks Carl for the all those infos! Do you have already an idea on the
> date of the
11 matches
Mail list logo
