> The compiler enforced type safety is often argued as not type safe because they are erased at runtime; but the actual type unsafety has a runtime check.
Were you trying to make the point that the biggest type safety hole in Java is in the one part where you have collections with unerased types? Because yeah that's kind of ironic.
It's ironic when you think about it.
The compiler enforced type safety is often argued as not type safe because they are erased at runtime; but the actual type unsafety has a runtime check.