> The idea that the object graph I see in scala corresponds 1:1 to the object graph I see in java for the same object is comforting Surely. Not merely comforti

> The idea that the object graph I see in scala corresponds 1:1 to the object graph I see in java for the same object is comforting Surely. Not merely comforting, but useful. But it entails deep compromises in the design of the type system that we're just not willing to make, especially since Ceylon is primarily a cross-platform language, not just a JVM language. > OTOH I have concrete cases where I need existential types for compatibility, much as I wish I didn't Right. Whether we'll eventually have to throw in the towel on this one and add use-site variance to Ceylon, purely to get better interop with Java, is a very interesting and bothersome topic.