I\'m trying to migrate Java 7 code to Java 8, so I\'ve code similar to:
package tests;
import java.util.Arrays;
import java.util.Map;
public class Tests {
In the first case, the method getString
is required to return a Comparable
instance. The compiler looks for overloads of the func
method, and it finds only one that can accept a Comparable
: func(Comparable ... input)
. Map
doesn't implement that interface, so the second overload is not applicable. There is no ambiguity.
In the second case, getString
can return anything. Both overloads work, so there is an ambiguity. Note though, the cast to T is unsafe/wrong in both cases.
The kind of generic method you've written basically tells the compiler "I can return an instance of any class you want that implements Comparable
". You can't actually keep this promise though.
Lets say I have the following code:
String str = getString();
Integer num = getString();
This code will compile, both String
and Integer
implement the Comparable
interface. The second line will fail at runtime though: the code tries to cast a String
to an Integer
.
Your second case is also wrong for the same reason I explained above. It promises it can return any type you want. It obiously can't keep that promise too (Runnable
here is a random example, it could be anything):
Runnable run = getString()
The compiler sees two possible overloads that both match, func(Comparable...input)
and func(ComparableMap ,?> m)
. It prefers the second one, because varargs methods are always chosen last (for compatebility reasons). All of this is corect behaviour.
The code then throws the ClassCastException because your getString
method doesn't keep it promise (letting the caller decide what kind of Comparable
to return).
The fundamental problem is that your getString
method makes a false promise. As such, I don't really know what that code tries to accomplish. If you can elaborate we may be able to help you furter.