Reference implementation

[Neal Gafter]

Maurizio:

Can you please define the "complex", "simple", and "full-complex"
approaches?  Which is used in the current implementation?  Which approach
can support inference in argument contexts (i.e. part occurs before overload
resolution, part after)?

Cheers,
Neal

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore <
Maurizio.Cimadamore at sun.com> wrote:

> Paul Benedict wrote:
> > Neal,
> >
> > Thank you for raising this point again!
> >
> > It was admitted the current diamond operator implementation is
> > incomplete compared to the "complex/full" solution. It was also
> > admitted the partial solution is not a "true subset" of the "complex"
> > solution. With that said, I am concerned the partial solution will
> > infer somethings in JDK 7, but a later JDK using the "complex"
> > solution would infer differently or invalidate inferences of the
> > partial solution. Joe, is that possible?
> >
> Both complex and simple are subset of full-complex. If some future
> release will switch to full-complex the transition will be smooth (no
> strange mismatch in types inferred by the diamond algotithm). On the
> other hand switching from simple to complex and vice-versa will cause
> problems.
>
> Maurizio
> > Paul
> >
> >
>
>
>