* generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...)
@ 2003-01-04 23:36 Alexandre E. Kopilovitch
2003-01-05 14:13 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2003-01-06 4:52 ` Kevin Cline
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Alexandre E. Kopilovitch @ 2003-01-04 23:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>
>"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
>
> > Generics in any form is an illness of programming languages.
>
>Why?
Perhaps the origin of this feeling is that they (generics, templates, etc.)
are unclear conceptually, above the programming level.
But there is good exception: functors in Standard ML.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...)
2003-01-04 23:36 generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...) Alexandre E. Kopilovitch
@ 2003-01-05 14:13 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2003-01-06 4:52 ` Kevin Cline
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov @ 2003-01-05 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
Alexandre E. Kopilovitch wrote:
> Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>>
>>"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
>>
>> > Generics in any form is an illness of programming languages.
>>
>>Why?
>
> Perhaps the origin of this feeling is that they (generics, templates,
> etc.) are unclear conceptually, above the programming level.
Yes. [I tried to explain my point of view in the original thread]
> But there is good exception: functors in Standard ML.
Unfortunately I do not know about Standard ML.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...)
2003-01-04 23:36 generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...) Alexandre E. Kopilovitch
2003-01-05 14:13 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
@ 2003-01-06 4:52 ` Kevin Cline
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Kevin Cline @ 2003-01-06 4:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
"Alexandre E. Kopilovitch" <aek@vib.usr.pu.ru> wrote in message news:<mailman.1041723482.14856.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>...
> Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
> >
> >"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> >
> > > Generics in any form is an illness of programming languages.
> >
> >Why?
>
> Perhaps the origin of this feeling is that they (generics, templates, etc.)
> are unclear conceptually, above the programming level.
I don't find them unclear at all. And what alternative solution is proposed?
Java doesn't have generics and as a result Java containers are not type-safe.
So some rather weak form of generics is being added to Java.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-06 4:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-01-04 23:36 generics as illness -;) (was: Re: Anybody ...) Alexandre E. Kopilovitch
2003-01-05 14:13 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov
2003-01-06 4:52 ` Kevin Cline
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox