Make TypedResource covariant in A

[iphydf]

Just like one can implicitly convert a ViewGroup to a View, we should be able to pass a TypedResource[ViewGroup] as TypedResource[View].

Workaround:

object TRUtil {
  def convert[A1, A2 <: A1](tr: TypedResource[A2]): TypedResource[A1] = {
    TypedResource[A1](tr.id)
  }
}

[pfn]

What is the use-case?

On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 8:42 AM iphydf notifications@github.com wrote:

Just like one can implicitly convert a ViewGroup to a View, we should be
able to pass a TypedResource[ViewGroup] as TypedResource[View].

Workaround:

object TRUtil {
def convert[A1, A2 <: A1](tr: TypedResource[A2]): TypedResource[A1] = {
TypedResourceA1
}
}

—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#288, or mute the
thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAfQxX7kqDgZrVLPT1XuQHlS403Sb_I1ks5qw8VogaJpZM4KO9w1
.

[iphydf]

The use case is no longer there. I used to pass TypedResource around, but in my case I could actually just pass the View around. In general, what is the harm in adding covariance?

[pfn]

I'd rather have a compelling reason to add covariance rather than vice versa

[chenakam]

I think add "+" to TypedResource[A] means TypedResource[+A] is faultless. No logical problems will triggered. TypedViewHolder[+T <: View] the same way.