The following code
class GenericCompilationFailureDemo {
List<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo> newList() {
return new ArrayList<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>();
};
void useList() {
List<GenericCompilationFailureDemo> list =
(List<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>) newList();
}
List<? extends Set<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>> newListOfSpecificSets() {
return new ArrayList<Set<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>();
};
void useListOfSpecificSets() {
List<Set<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>> listOfSpecificSets =
(List<Set<GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>) newListOfSpecificSets();
}
List<? extends Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>> newListOfSets() {
return new ArrayList<Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>();
};
void useListOfSet() {
List<Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>> listOfSets =
(List<Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>) newListOfSets();
}
}
compiles under Sun JDK 1.6.0_20 (64-bit on Windows Vista, but I don’t think that makes any difference) but causes the following compilation failure under Oracle JDK 1.7.0_01 (same platform):
[ERROR] src\main\java\GenericCompilationFailureDemo.java:[56,78] error: inconvertible types
Note that the first two “extends-to-specific-type” casts in useList and useListOfSpecificSets both still succeed under 1.7.0_01, so it would seem it’s something to do with the “double generic extends”.
Any ideas what might have changed between 6 and 7, and whether the observed behaviour is according to spec or a bug?
edited in response to Sanjay’s comment:
@Sanjay: Aha, interesting! Here the output from java -version:
java version "1.7.0_01"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0_01-b08)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 21.1-b02, mixed mode)
And here the result of javac GenericCompilationFailureDemo.java (same code as above with import statements for List, ArrayList and Set):
GenericCompilationFailureDemo.java:30: error: inconvertible types
(List<Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>) newListOfSets()
;
^
required: List<Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>>
found: List<CAP#1>
where CAP#1 is a fresh type-variable:
CAP#1 extends Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo> from capture of ?
extends Set<? extends GenericCompilationFailureDemo>
Note: GenericCompilationFailureDemo.java uses unchecked or unsafe operations.
Note: Recompile with -Xlint:unchecked for details.
1 error
This is apparently a javac7 bug. It should be allowed per casting conversion rules [1]
One of the rules allows a narrowing reference conversion … followed by an unchecked conversion
Casting
List<A> => List<B>is allowed by this ruleThat’s not all the story though; the spec has further rules to forbid casting like
List<String>=>List<Integer>, for they are provably distinct parameterizedtypes. There is no object belonging to the two types at the same time, so compiler think it’s better to disallow this apparent programming error. (You can bypass it by explicitly
List<String>=>List=>List<Integer>)The last rule doesn’t apply here though; so it looks like a javac7 bug.
Why the last rule doesn’t apply: so we are casting
List<? extends A>toList<A>. Here capture conversion is applied toList<? extends A>[2] so we are actually castingList<T>toList<A>, whereTis a new type variable with upper boundA.The question is whether
List<T>andList<A>are provably distinct parameterized types. My understanding is that it’s false (it has to be false for your first two examples to compile). SinceTis a type variable, it can take a value to makeList<T>andList<A>the same parameterized type (i.e. whenT=A). This reasoning should work for any typeA.[1] http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/conversions.html#5.5
[2] http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/expressions.html#341306