What we have lost ?

[Brian Goetz]

>
>     (I think the idea of "class for which there is no ref type" is a
>     non-starter; for all of the types you talk about (vectors, etc),
>     you could make the same argument for `int`, but no one is saying
>     we don't need `Integer`.  I think what you are really getting at
>     here is coming back to some form of "I want val-default".)
>
>
> There are types which should never be null for different reasons, for 
> those types having a reference projection is an issue.
> A nullable int is something useful hence we need Integer, sadly not 
> all the value types are like this.

Yes, they are.  If you ever want to call a method reflectively on a 
value object, you have to pass it to Method::invoke, which takes an 
Object.  That's a reference type.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/valhalla-spec-observers/attachments/20220907/7c6ce709/attachment-0001.htm>