4 ms·
Seems like the rub is "The main requirement of a heterogeneous list is that it can hold any type." when I think I would colloquially say, and use as a working d
by gugagore 6y ago
Seems like the rub is "The main requirement of a heterogeneous list is that it can hold any type." when I think I would colloquially say, and use as a working definition, that they need to hold different types.
Also the rub is that "type" means two things: what a variable can have OR a class (that inherits from `Object`).
There isn't in my opinion a good reason for this design of Java's type system: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14477743/why-are-there-primitive-datatype-in-java https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14477743/why-are-there-p...
- t-writescode 6y agoBut ... is there any functional difference? Like, chances are, the individual is going to say that Ruby provides that power; but, by the time you've reached Ruby levels of abstraction, the odds of any argument about performance and data marshalling go out the window. It's a difference without a meaning, as far as I can tell.