Is there any other way of achieving similar result...

# codingconventions

[gabrielfv]

Is there any other way of achieving similar results to that?

inline fun <reified T : Any> withType(
        t: KClass<T> = T::class
) = ...

inline fun <reified T1 : Any, reified T2 : Any> withType(
        t1: KClass<T1> = T1::class,
        t2: KClass<T2> = T2::class
) = ...

inline fun <reified T1 : Any, reified T2 : Any, reified T3 : Any> withType(
        t1: KClass<T1> = T1::class,
        t2: KClass<T2> = T2::class,
        t3: KClass<T3> = T3::class
) = ...

inline fun <reified T1 : Any, reified T2 : Any, reified T3 : Any, reified T4 : Any> withType(
        t1: KClass<T1> = T1::class,
        t2: KClass<T2> = T2::class,
        t3: KClass<T3> = T3::class,
        t4: KClass<T4> = T4::class
) = ...

[Cody Engel]

What output are you looking for with these functions? This is totally valid:

inline fun <reified T : Any> withType(vararg classes: T) = { ... }

[Cody Engel]

Would be called as such:

withType(String::class, Int::class)

[gabrielfv]

Yeah, that is the first version of what I did, and works just like that. I was intending to make it a bit tidier by using reification, and call it like

withType<String, Int>()

Instead

[gabrielfv]

Cutting away the ::class bits