Collection.toArray <was> Re: Loose ends inventory

[Brian Goetz]

>> only reason to consider it now is because of the accidental reality of
>> internal
>> tests that would have to be changed -- which test code that *no user
>> will ever
>> write*.
>
> I've thought that before and was wrong, so am extra-cautious.

Its fair to be extra cautious.  The underlying question here is one of 
compatibility, and who pays for it.  Are we actually committed to never 
introducing an overload that might require clients to occasionally (even 
if only in bizarro corner cases like toArray(null)) add a cast to 
disambiguate?  How far are we willing to go in degrading the usability 
the API (or just not adding a useful method at all) in order to avoid a 
small number of corner cases having to add a cast to explicitly select 
an overload?