valhalla-dev Digest, Vol 7, Issue 66
peter.levart at gmail.com
Tue Jan 20 10:11:56 UTC 2015
On 01/20/2015 12:33 AM, Brian Goetz wrote:
>> Multi-dimensional matching is not well-served by any loose or ambiguous
>> matching, which is why I had specified a system not needing such.
> Except that's exactly how method overload selection works in Java
> today ; by contrast, there are no left-to-right precedence
> mechanisms. So while you might consider the left-to-right rule
> "better", when taken in the context of how the language already works
> (and how developers think), I think this has to be rejected.
>  The lack of a meet rule actually causes problems here as well,
> such as overloads like foo(Object, String) vs foo(String, Object)
> (which do you call with foo("", "")?)
Could the meet rule be added to overloads in Java? I mean only in the
form of a compile-time warning of course. It seems it could be useful
for API designers.
More information about the valhalla-dev