The following compiles as expected:
List<Set<? extends Set<?>>> list = new ArrayList<Set<? extends Set<?>>>();
list.add(new HashSet<Set<String>>());
list.add(new HashSet<Set<Integer>>());
The problem is that generics is type invariant.
Consider the simpler example:
- Given that there is a casting conversion from
Animal
to Dog
(e.g. Dog extends Animal
)...
- A
List<Animal>
IS NOT a List<Dog>
- There is a capture conversion from
List<? extends Animal>
to a List<Dog>
Now here's what happens in this scenario:
- Given that there is a capture conversion from
Set<?>
to Set<String>
...
- A
Set<Set<?>>
IS NOT a Set<Set<String>>
- There is a capture conversion from
Set<? extends Set<?>>
to Set<Set<String>>
So if you want a List<T>
where you can add a Set<Set<String>>
, Set<Set<Integer>>
, etc, then T
is NOT Set<Set<?>>
, but rather Set<? extends Set<?>>
.
Related questions
- Can't cast to to unspecific nested type with generics
- Multiple wildcards on a generic methods makes Java compiler (and me!) very confused
- Java Generic List<List<? extends Number>>
- Any simple way to explain why I cannot do List<Animal> animals = new ArrayList<Dog>()?
- What is the difference between <E extends Number> and <Number>?
See also
- Java Generics Tutorial
- Generics and Subtyping | Wildcards | More Fun with Wildcards
- Angelika Langer's Java Generics FAQ
- What is a bounded wildcard?
- Which super-subtype relationships exist among instantiations of generic types?