heap-pollution | 易学教程

What is an apparently correct example of Java code causing heap pollution?

阅读更多关于 What is an apparently correct example of Java code causing heap pollution?

问题 I'm trying to decide what to do every time I get a Java heap pollution warning when using parameterized varargs such as in public static <T> LinkedList<T> list(T... elements) { ... } It seems to me that if I am confident not to be using some weird casts in my methods, I should just use @SafeVarargs and move on. But is this correct, or do I need to be more careful? Is there apparently correct code that is actually not safe when using parameterized varargs? Reading about the subject, I notice

Java 1.7 varargs function reported as unchecked warning

阅读更多关于 Java 1.7 varargs function reported as unchecked warning

We use some varargs functions and as we move to java 1.7 we are getting a strange unchecked warning. Function add in interface ICache public interface ICache<O> { void add(Object source, O... objects); } in an interface reports the error. ICache.java:18: warning: [unchecked] Possible heap pollution from parameterized vararg type O void add(Object source, O... objects); where O is a type-variable: O extends Object declared in interface ICache 1 warning O extends Object, as its generic cache class. I read the xlint warnings and we do compile with unchecked on, but http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7

Java 1.7 varargs function reported as unchecked warning

阅读更多关于 Java 1.7 varargs function reported as unchecked warning

问题 We use some varargs functions and as we move to java 1.7 we are getting a strange unchecked warning. Function add in interface ICache public interface ICache<O> { void add(Object source, O... objects); } in an interface reports the error. ICache.java:18: warning: [unchecked] Possible heap pollution from parameterized vararg type O void add(Object source, O... objects); where O is a type-variable: O extends Object declared in interface ICache 1 warning O extends Object, as its generic cache