Re: Joe-E

On Thu, April 29, 2010 09:52, David Wagner wrote:
> I suspect the best solution is going to be to do the same thing we
> did for ImmutableArray and PowerlessArray: write a trusted library in
> Java, review it very carefully, and include it in the Joe-E library.
> You'll have to spend some time poring over that code, as it's pretty
> tricky code.  (You'll notice that it uses reflection to dynamically
> check that all elements are of the expected type, rather than using
> the static type system; this is how a PowerlessArray can be used to
> store both user classes that are declared Powerless as well as
> library classes that are honorarily Powerless, like String.)
>
> Ideally, the goal is that Joe-E would provide a rich enough set of
> libraries that you never have to run into this problem in application
> code.  In practice, Joe-E is a research project and does not have as
> rich a set of libraries as we would like, so you may need to extend
> our libraries.  If you do, you might consider submitting your code for
> inclusion in the Joe-E system.

This is most likely a completely clueless question (given that I know
verry little of Joe-E and have limited knowledge of Java generics, so I'l
be commenting from a C++ generics point of view), but wouldn't it be more
logical for any 'container' templates to be made honorarily transitively
Powerless with respect to T ?  That is, a smarter validation rather than a
richer library ?