Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 233277
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T20:05:14+00:00 2026-05-11T20:05:14+00:00

Suppose I have the following class: public class FixExpr { Expr<FixExpr> in; } Now

  • 0

Suppose I have the following class:

public class FixExpr {
  Expr<FixExpr> in;
}

Now I want to introduce a generic argument, abstracting over the use of Expr:

public class Fix<F> {
  F<Fix<F>> in;
}

But Eclipse doesn’t like this:

The type F is not generic; it cannot be parametrized with arguments <Fix<F>>

Is this possible at all or have I overlooked something that causes this specific instance to break?

Some background information: in Haskell this is a common way to write generic functions; I’m trying to port this to Java. The type argument F in the example above has kind * -> * instead of the usual kind *. In Haskell it looks like this:

newtype Fix f = In { out :: f (Fix f) }
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-11T20:05:15+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 8:05 pm

    I think what you’re trying to do is simply not supported by Java generics. The simpler case of

    public class Foo<T> {
        public T<String> bar() { return null; }
    }
    

    also does not compile using javac.

    Since Java does not know at compile-time what T is, it can’t guarantee that T<String> is at all meaningful. For example if you created a Foo<BufferedImage>, bar would have the signature

    public BufferedImage<String> bar()
    

    which is nonsensical. Since there is no mechanism to force you to only instantiate Foos with generic Ts, it refuses to compile.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Ask A Question

Stats

  • Questions 114k
  • Answers 114k
  • Best Answers 0
  • User 1
  • Popular
  • Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to approach applying for a job at a company ...

    • 7 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    How to handle personal stress caused by utterly incompetent and ...

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team

    What is a programmer’s life like?

    • 5 Answers
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer Look at the SqlBulkCopy class. Also it sounds obvious, but… May 11, 2026 at 10:12 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer You're using the wrong approach then. From the Richfaces docs… May 11, 2026 at 10:12 pm
  • Editorial Team
    Editorial Team added an answer There's a book for you: Working Effectively with Legacy Code… May 11, 2026 at 10:12 pm

Related Questions

Suppose I have the following class: public class TestBase { public bool runMethod1 {
Suppose i have the following class. public class Location { public Id { get;
Suppose I have the following declaration: class Over1 { protected: class Under1 { };
Suppose I have the following two classes in two different assemblies: //in assembly A
I'm doing something stupid, I suppose. I swear I've done this before without issues

Trending Tags

analytics british company computer developers django employee employer english facebook french google interview javascript language life php programmer programs salary

Top Members

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.