I thought that it was due to type erasure too…
Also I am using isInstance and not isIstanceOf. I know it is not a usual thing, but is it possible to know at runtime that a given list is a List[Int] or a List[Double] ?
For a research project, I am building a type system in Scala, in which type calculus can be done (unions, intersections…). In my type system, a “type” has to be considered as a subset of all objects that can live in runtime. Hence, in this type system I want to be able to express native Scala types. For example, being able to check wether x belongs to the type composed by all Scala integers. Or, in this example, wether a given list l belongs to the set of the lists composed by integers, List[Int]. That is precisely why I am using isInstance method.
Ah sorry, I was on mobile and didn’t see that.
But then again, that is some kind of runtime “type” (actually class) testing.
I believe that you may do the same thing the compiler does, create a new type for each possible combination. Not sure how the compile actually manages this, but a naive approach would be something like:
sealed trait Type
final case object Int extends Type
final case class List(type: Type) extends Type
It isn’t. The type is erased. Type erasure doesn’t mean the type is just, like, hidden away somewhere and you have to do a little extra dance to get to it. It is erased, it is GONE, it no longer exists, it has joined the choir invisible. This is true in both Java and Scala.
In the case of Scala’s immutable collections like scala.collection.immutable.List the situation is even more extreme — the empty List[Int] and the empty List[Double] are literally one and the same value:
scala 2.13.3> List[Double]() eq List[Int]()
val res0: Boolean = true