This week's book giveaway is in the OO, Patterns, UML and Refactoring forum. We're giving away four copies of Refactoring for Software Design Smells: Managing Technical Debt and have Girish Suryanarayana, Ganesh Samarthyam & Tushar Sharma on-line! See this thread for details.
Your second list is not parameterized which means you can shred whatever object you like into the list.
The big bang will happen once you want to retrieve values back from the list trying to convert them in what you expect to be an integer.
The reason why this works is the downwards compatability with older java versions and programs. It's ugly and error prone so never work with unparameterized collections.
JDBCSupport - An easy to use, light-weight JDBC framework -
Now you'll get an exception. As you know generics is all about compile time type safety. So you won't get any exception when you add a String to an <Integer> List. Because a typed collection can have any type of elements added to it if you can fool the compiler, as for the JVM a typed collection is not different from raw collection. When you get an element out of a typed collection, the compiler inserts a type caste at that statement. So in the above case the compiler inserts a cast which results in an exception. The actual code which the JVM sees looks something like this
When you used a println statement, you didn't get any exception because the println method takes Object as a parameter, so the compiler doesn't inserts any cast...