(compare, in plain old Java:

public <T> T[] toArray(Foo<T> foo, Class<T> tClass) {
    return (T[]) foo.getListOfT().stream().toArray(size -> (T[]) Array.newInstance(tClass, size));
  }

@domfox something like this?

//Callable from Kotlin
inline fun <reified T: Any> doStuff() = doStuff(T::class.java)

// Callable from java
fun <T: Any> doStuff(clas: Class<T>) = Unit

Is there no way to have it the other way around?

The

T

in the non-reified one would be erased, so it won’t be possible to call reified with T from non-reified

Well, this is why I wonder whether having an instance of Class<T> around could be used to get around the erasure.

In the case I'm looking at, I only really want the reified type parameter around so I can call

toTypedArray()

on a

List<T>

, and I suppose I could instead construct a suitable array using my

Class<T>

and populate it manually...

I don’t think you can do that.

toTypedArray

itself is reified, and since it’s impossible to go from non-reified to reified in this case. I guess you’d have to fall back to some sort of unsafe casting

Hmm actually,

reified

requires the function to be

inline

so it's probably more complicated than that.

It looks as if

Class<T>

doesn't in general carry enough type information to do all the work that a reified type parameter could do. A reified type parameter basically picks up the type declared to the compiler in the code into which the function is inlined, including any of its type parameters. That information is lost - erased - if all you have in hand is

List.class

, for example.

So it's going to have to be an unsafe cast, sadly...

Indeed. Inlining is a compile time process

any kotlin devs out here?

I encountered a really weird type inference behavior

maybe i am doing something wrong, but can someone explain this one to me: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46853846/kotlin-hard-failing-an-up-cast-to-an-inferred-in-site-parameter

also, by "kotlin dev" I meant people who work "on" the language, not "with" the language.. the latter would probably be all of us

is there anyway to make the no arg constructor available only at runtime ?? (need it for a spring data project)

only reflectively you mean? Just make the no-arg constructor

private

and don't use it anywhere else in the file

nods

i have mixed feelings about that ... but ... i think i like it.

📣 Did you know? If you have twitter, you can follow https://twitter.com/kotlin 😉

`override x by y.z`: in my example above I could use

class C : A by AImpl() , B by BImpl()

but that would not handle renaming of properties. And also falls apart if AImpl() and BImpl() require complex parameters (e.g.

Bimpl

needs value from

AImpl

), or if AImpl() and BImpl() each provide half the required properties from the base interface

- my video on kotlin with swing

my video on kotlin with data structures

isn't #feed more suited for that

oh sorry

Guys, I want to create a GUI using Kotlin, I saw this: https://www.jetbrains.org/intellij/sdk/docs/tutorials/kotlin.html#ui-in-kotlin But how do I get the “com.intellij.ui.layout” package? Is there a jar or way to use get it easily?

That's for when you want to write an idea plugin.

ooh I see

Try #tornadofx

I installed it using the intelliJ idea plugin but when I create a new TornadoFX View it says: “Unresolved reference tornadofx” in this line: “import tornadofx.*”