Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

1
  • I don't think the issue was "broken compatibility" so much as "complicated interoperabilty". If code has an object Producer which constructs and returns a reference to an implementation of List, all of whose members are of type Animal, and another object Consumer which expects to be given a type-erased List<Animal>, the code can easily use the two objects together. If, however, Producer had expected a reified TList<T>, it would have been much harder to have an object which use Producer to supply things for Consumer. Commented Apr 27, 2015 at 1:55