RefObject and ValObject

[Maurizio Cimadamore]

Maybe (Remi correct me if I'm wrong), the problem Remi was referring to 
is that we also have existing generic declarations like <T extends 
Object> which, in the new world, will mean either VALUE or REFERENCE. I 
think this is a consequence of the choice (1) I described in my email - 
e.g. reinterpret Object in type position as TOP_TYPE.

Maurizio

On 15/04/2019 19:00, Brian Goetz wrote:
>>
>> It's not a minor change, and all code that uses a type parameter that 
>> have Object as bound will become ambiguous.
>
> I don’t think so.  You can’t say
>
>     new T()
>
> when T is bounded at Object (or anything, for that matter.).
>
> What ambiguity are you afraid of here?
>
>