[Gladis]

Std is the standard namespace... C++ has templates.

[amoralis]

In java it only represents compile time checking

[Gladis]

amoralis, It SHOULD affect code. Compile time checking leads to a few problems.
For instance... can't create genericized lists.

[AmeliaR]

The difference is that c++ template generate code. java's generics do not.

[amoralis]

That's what I just said :)

[Gladis]

But C++ is faster with worse code. So.

[Aaron Zapashniy]

Now i read something about variance.. and what i briefly read gave me the impression that i'd be able to specify my method as void doIt(List<Parent..>) or void doIt(List<-Parent>)

[amoralis]

This issue Aaron Zapashniy raised is obnoxious because you can't overload methods with the only different in parameters being the object parameterizing the generic collection
I.e. doIt(List<parent> list); can't be overriden by doIt(List<Child> list);

[Gladis]

Aaron Zapashniy, List<? extends Parent>
Which includes Parent and all subclasses of parent.

[Aaron Zapashniy]

OOooh
That's nice!

[Gladis]

Or the completly useless <? super Parent>, which is the superclass and all subclasses of superclasses of Parent.

[Aaron Zapashniy]

Gladis, <Object>

[amoralis]

<- still can't use generics on a regular basis

[martinar_kauaro]

? extends Foo is bad, it's not better than no generics.

[Gladis]

Aaron Zapashniy, Ah, but it's more typing and harder to read!
It must be better!

[amoralis]

martinar_kauaro, why is it bad?

[Gladis]

martinar_kauaro, It does what we want it to do. how is that bad?

[Aaron Zapashniy]

I'd think it'd basically just say "hey compiler, make sure whatever i throw at this method contains Parents in one form or another"

[martinar_kauaro]

amoralis, Because you're again killing the typesafety. I've seen quite some code snippets that relied on generics to find "wrong object type inserted" exceptions.

[amoralis]

martinar_kauaro, no you're not
you should be able to pass in a child class

[Aaron Zapashniy]

If the method in question operates on the param as Parent, what harm could there be?
It'd provide exactly the level of type safety i desire.
(but WOW is that ugly and verbose syntax..)

[Gladis]

Aaron Zapashniy, Well, Java as a whole is ugly and verbose syntax.

[Aaron Zapashniy]

Ah well. i guess i'll just declare my collections with <Parent>.
Thanks fellas.