For normies, what is wrong with Java generics? (Do the same complaints apply to C# generics?) I came from C++ to Java, and I found Java generics pretty easy to use. I'm not interested in what "PL (programming language) people" have to say about it. They dislike all generic/parametric polymorphism implementations except their pet language that no one uses. I'm interested in practical things that work and are easy for normies to learn and use well.
> Even the Java team themselves warned the Go team to not make that mistake.
> I'm not interested in what "PL (programming language) people" have to say about it. They dislike all generic/parametric polymorphism implementations except their pet language that no one uses.
That's strange. I seem to recall the PL community invented the generics system for Java [0,1]. Actually, I'm pretty sure Philip Wadler had to show them how to work out contravariance correctly. And topically to this thread, Rob Pike asked for his help again designing the generics system for Go [2,3]. A number of mistakes under consideration were curtailed as a result, detailed in that LWN article.
There are countless other examples, so can you elaborate on what you're talking about? Because essentially all meaningful progress on programming languages (yes, including the ones you use) was achieved, or at least fundamentally enabled, by "PL people".
Yeah, it _doesn’t_ apply to C# generics. Basically, if you’ve got List<Person> and List<Company> in C#, those are different classes. In Java, there’s only one class that’s polymorphic. This causes a surprising number of restrictions: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/generics/restri...
I don't understand this part. Can you give some concrete examples? In my experience, Google Gson and Jackson FasterXML can solve 99.9% of the Java Generic issues that I might have around de/ser.
I could, or you could use google.
Neither of those tools can solve any issue caused by type erasure.
Just to give some examples, the instanceof operator does not work with generic types, it's not possible to instantiate a generic type (can't do a new T()), can't overload methods that differ only in generic parameter type (so List<String> vs List<Integer>) and so on. Some limitations can be worked around with sending around explicit type info (like also sending the Class<T> when using T), reflection etc., but it's cumbersome, and not everything can be solved that way.
