[m-rev.] for review: Box no-tag types in the Java back-end

[Fergus Henderson]

On 13-Jan-2003, Michael Wybrow <mjwybrow at cs.mu.OZ.AU> wrote:
> 
> +++ handle_options.m	13 Jan 2003 03:09:29 -0000
> @@ -411,6 +411,11 @@
> +	%   - box no-tag types
> +	%         We require no-tag types to be boxed since in Java there
> +	%         are some types (such as java.lang.String) that can't be
> +	%         cast to another type and then successfully cast back to
> +	%         their original type.

Could you please explain in more detail?
What's the problem with casting from java.lang.String to
java.lang.Object and back again?
(If the other type is something other than java.lang.Object,
why is that the case?)

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
The University of Melbourne         |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------