[FIXED] why type variable is non-reifiable type in java

Issue

I'm currently learning java generics and below is a list of types in java that is non-reifiable.

A type is not reifiable if it is one of the following:

• A type variable (such as T)

• A parameterized type with actual parameters (such as List<Number>, ArrayList<String>, or Map<String, Integer>)

• A parameterized type with a bound (such as List<? extends Number> or Comparable<? super String>)

I understand why parameterized type with actual parameter and parameterized type with bound is non-refieable, because after runtime erasure, the only type information left is List, but why is type variable (such as T) a non-reifiable type? I thought at runtime, after type erasure, T would become Object (given T is an unbound type parameter), so the type information is available.

Is there something wrong with my understanding?

Solution

The docs state that

A non-reifiable type does not have all of its information available at runtime.

The type of T at runtime is Object so information is lost. An example of the information that is lost is how an object can be created. Consider this class:

public class A {
    private int a;
    public A() {
        a = 5;
    }
}

Now look at this not compiling code:

public class Generic<T> {
    T foo() {
        return new T(); //Compiler Error!
    }
}

If this was allowed and you were instantiating a Generic<A> g = new Generic<>(); and calling g.foo(), the constructor of T could not be called, because, at runtime, T is only known as Object. Therefore, an valid instance of A cannot be created and returned. You even cannot be sure which information a constructor of T needs. The information how T can be constructed is lost.

That is one reason why type parameters must be non-reifiable types.

Answered By - Tobias
Answer Checked By - Cary Denson (JavaFixing Admin)