Here's what I would suspect after running the following at the REPL user=> (set! *warn-on-reflection* true) true user=> (defn bar [o] (.toString o)) Reflection warning, NO_SOURCE_PATH:605 - reference to field toString can't be resolved. #'user/bar user=> (bar 1) "1"
How does the reader know the difference between .hashCode and .reallyObsureMethod? It would need to keep a whitelist of everything in object, and know that these methods can be called directly. Maybe the reader should be upgraded to handle this? Could be totally wrong. Sean On Feb 24, 2:56 am, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net> wrote: > The following trivial code generates a reflection warning for the call > to hashCode: > > (set! *warn-on-reflection* true) > > (defn foo [o] > (.hashCode o)) > > It's easy to fix: > > (defn foo [#^Object o] > (.hashCode o)) > > but I don't understand why a type hint for java.lang.Object could ever > be necessary. My understanding is (was?) that java.lang.Object is the > default type for all function arguments in Clojure. Am I wrong? > > Konrad. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
