[armedbear-devel] Losing type information after storing in java.util.ArrayList

[Mark Evenson]

On 3/23/10 7:16 PM, Alessio Stalla wrote:
[…]
>> Comments and advice solicited.
>
> I believe the isAssignableFrom check was just a plain mistake. The
> "intended type" can be as generic as possible (i.e. it can be
> java.lang.Object for any JavaObject) so it does not make much sense to
> check against it. Imho it's correct to only do the isInstance() call.
> Arrays of primitive types and arrays of corresponding wrapper types
> are not interchangeable in Java so there should be no concern about
> them in this context.
>
> Note also that the intended type iirc is only used by jcall in its
> abbreviated form - (jcall "methodName" instance args) - to access
> methods using a supertype of the actual class of the object when
> possible. This means that the intended type can be set quite loosely;
> it's basically just a hint for jcall.

Thanks for the analysis, as it makes me quite a bit more comfortable 
with the change:  I retract the "I'm unhappy with this change" comment, 
and consider this problem fixed.

-- 
"A screaming comes across the sky.  It has happened before, but there
is nothing to compare to it now."