I can accomplish this with star types, but I'd rather have the type safety (and also the intellij he...

# announcements

[snowe]

I can accomplish this with star types, but I'd rather have the type safety (and also the intellij help from knowing the type)

[Andreas Sinz]

Why is * less safe in your example?

[snowe]

I can't really think of any reason it's less safe other than if the library I'm calling decides to change their signature, then my code will still compile (when it probably shouldn't)

[Andreas Sinz]

* just says I don't care what Generic Type the class has, I won't use it anyway, so if you actually not gonna use it, its safe to use * IMO

[snowe]

yeah, sounds good. I'll go with the *, but that means there is no way to grab the type of this and use it as the generic type? that kinda sucks. 😕

[karelpeeters]

Well do you need to use it or not?

[Andreas Sinz]

you can't use generic functions of this, yes

[karelpeeters]

Can't you just add another generic type parameter that's not reified and isn't used?

[Andreas Sinz]

@karelpeeters if you specify one parameter, you have to specify all of them. its either none or all

[karelpeeters]

Huh that's too bad.

[snowe]

yeah 😞

[snowe]

it's an interface to a library function, whether it's used in the future or not is not up to me.

[Anuar Neto]

Hi, is it valid to create an extension to the exception?
something like this:
fun <T : Exception> T.expect(res: ResultValidator<A???>): ResultValidator<A???>
And then call like: AccessDeniedException.expect(resultValidatorOfTypeBlah)

[snowe]

no, it's all a chain, so expectException is called on a chain of other methods.