I agree with you that matching exactly the java method signatures
would be less confusing. I was advocating this to be as transparent
as possible with interop. I was in minority :)
Reviewing what I said, case 1b is a bit more complex, the compiler cannot
decide between the two methods case (byte
The problem is that the current behavior is not consistent with what
you describe. Sometimes it fails, but sometimes it works when it
should fail.
And there's no documentation or guidelines about the current behavior
at all, so it's all very confusing.
My opinion is that interop is essentially ug
1) Your signature has to match your java method,
(Foo/bar (byte 1)) will work.
2) There's been a long thread about this. People wanted ints and longs to
have a similar behavior and match whatever signature is available when
doing
interop.
When passing (Long. 1), interop tries t
