This Generics work (At least in my compiler)

[Jose Campana]

Ahoy there ! brotherhood of Java (otherwise known as Java Ranch)

The following question is about Generics.......

I have noticed that it doesn't really matter if you don't write the Generic type of a Collection on the right side, I mean on the actual object as long as you type it on the reference variable side.

Like this:

List<Mouse> mice = new ArrayList();

I think this still behaves as a Generic heterogeneous Collection, but... the reverse isn't true, right? (correct me If I'm wrong please...)

something like this...

List mice = new ArrayList<Mouse>();

What are the implications for both cases ?

Could someone please tell me...

Good Luck,

Jose

[ April 16, 2008: Message edited by: Jose Campana ]
[ April 16, 2008: Message edited by: Jose Campana ]

[Harshit Rastogi]

Originally posted by Jose Campana:
Ahoy there ! brotherhood of Java (otherwise know as Java Ranch)

List<Mouse> mice = new ArrayList();

I think this still behaves as a Generic heterogeneous Collection, but... the reverse isn't true, right? (correct me If I'm wrong please...)

something like this...

List mice = new ArrayList<Mouse>();

What are the implications for both cases ?

Could someone please tell me...

Good Luck,

Jose

hey even i tried

 List listInt1 = new ArrayList<Integer>();

i found that a string can be added to the listInt1 and its not giving any compile time error.
But

 List<Integer> listInt1 = new ArrayList();

this restrict me using string.
m also trying to find why ?

[Jose Campana]

Hey Harshit, it's weird isn't it ?



Thanks for your reply!

[Ernest Friedman-Hill]

Generics are more or less an illusion, conjured by the compiler. An ArrayList object does not know that it's being pointed at by a variable of type List<Integer>, any more than it know it's being pointed at by a variable of type List instead of ArrayList. Type checks in generic collections are all done by the compiler at compile time; there are no exceptions or anything that happen if the "wrong" type is stored in a collection at runtime.

So this is why the generic type of the object, as allocated, doesn't really matter, but the type of the variable pointing to it does.

Make sense?

[Jose Campana]

Mr. Friedman-Hill,

I suppose it does make sense, Could I assume this topic belongs to something relative to type erasure?

I never knew it could get so complex. However I thought it was worth asking this question since it was never explained in any book out there.

Sorry for the delayed response.

Have a nice day!
Sincerely,
Jose

[abhishek pendkay]

Yes your question does have to do with type erasure

Jose Campana

However I thought it was worth asking this question since it was never explained in any book out there.

type erasure is explained in many books including K&B and Complete Reference etc so its surprising you didnt come across it , ofcourse you will only find it in books on Java version 5 and above...