Notes on implementing concise calls to constructors with type parameters

[Joseph D. Darcy]

Mark Derricutt wrote:
> If you were going to use this syntax, why not be somewhat consistent with
> the dynamic language folk and go for:
>
> def foo = new ArrayList<String>();
>   

Java is not a dynamic language; I find declaring the full type on the 
left hand side (e.g. "List<String>") and initializing with the 
implementation type but without repeating the type parameter (e.g. "new 
ArrayList<>()") to be easy to read and more in keeping with the design 
of Java.

-Joe

>
> Visually I find it more logical to read it this way.
>
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Howard Lovatt <howard.lovatt at iee.org>wrote:
>
>   
>> ArrayList<String> foo = new();
>>     
>
>
>
>