Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
> So, I am sure this cannot be achieved with C++ generics, which is
> supported entirely at compile time. As for Java, I am not even aware
> if it has any generics support at all.
So ditch generics and use good old void* or Object. Just because it
can't be written in a type safe way, doesn't mean it can't be written.
> The types Node<T>, Node<Node<T>>, Node<Node<Node<T>>>, ...
> will need to be created at runtime, as it is impossible to know at
> compile time how deep the type nesting will need to be (although in
> the case of a finger tree we know this will be close to log2(N), where
> N is the number of leaf nodes of the tree).
That sounds like a runtime cost that I'd rather not have to pay for the
sake of type safety.
John
--
John Snelson, Oracle Corporation http://snelson.org.uk/john
Berkeley DB XML: http://oracle.com/database/berkeley-db/xml
XQilla: http://xqilla.sourceforge.net
