I got a strange compiler error when using generics within a for-each loop in Java. Is this a Java compiler bug, or am I really missing something here?
Here is my whole class:
public class Generics<T extends Object> {
public Generics(T myObject){
// I didn't really need myObject
}
public List<String> getList(){
List<String> list = new ArrayList<String>();
list.add("w00t StackOverflow");
return list;
}
public static void main(String...a){
Generics generics = new Generics(new Object());
for(String s : generics.getList()){
System.out.println(s);
}
}
}
The compiler is complaining about the line with the for-each: “Type mismatch cannot convert from element type Object to String.”
If I make this subtle change, it compiles:
public static void main(String...a){
Generics<?> generics = new Generics(new Object());
for(String s : generics.getList()){
System.out.println(s);
}
}
I know getList() does use generics, but it uses them in what I thought was a completely unrelated way. I could understand this if I were trying to iterate over something of type T and getList() returned a List<T> or something, but that’s not the case here. The return type of getList() should have absolutely nothing to do with T and shouldn’t care whether I use the raw type for my Generics object or not…right? Shouldn’t these be completely unrelated, or am I really missing something here?
Note that the code also compiles if I do this, which I thought should have been equivalent to the first as well:
public static void main(String...a){
Generics generics = new Generics(new Object());
List<String> list = generics.getList();
for(String s : list){
System.out.println(s);
}
}
The difference is that when you use the raw type, all the generic references within the member signatures are converted to their raw forms too. So effectively you’re calling a method which now has a signature like this:
Now as for why your final version compiles – although it does, there’s a warning if you use
-Xlint:This is similar to:
… which also compiles, but with a warning under
-Xlint.The moral of the story: don’t use raw types!