Silent tuition class cast

You may cancel at any time. Any tuition payments processed prior to the time of cancellation are non-refundable. Tuition rates do not include a $100 graduation application fee, due at the time of graduation. * High-definition videos are made available upon release. Resolution is subject to bandwidth availability at the student location.

Having being taught during my C++ days about evils of the C-style cast operator I was pleased at first to find that in Java 5 java.lang.Class had acquired a cast method. I thought that finally we have an OO way of dealing with casting. Turns out Class.cast is not the same as static_cast in C++. It is more like reinterpret_cast. It will not generate a compilation error where it is expected and instead will defer to runtime. Here is a simple test case to demonstrate different behaviors. package test; import static org.junit.Assert.assertTrue; import org.junit.Test; public class TestCast So, these are my questions. • Should Class.cast() be banished to Generics land? There it has quite a few legitimate uses. • Should compilers generate compile errors when Class.cast() is used and illegal conditions can be determined at compile time? • Should Java provide a cast operator as a language construct similar to C++? Simple answer: (1) Where is "Generics land"? How is that different from how the cast operator is used now? (2) Probably. But in 99% of all Java code ever written, it is extremely unlikely for anyone to use Class.cast() when illegal conditions can be determined at compile time. In that case, everybody but you just uses the standard cast operator. (3) Java does have a cast operator as a language construct. It is not similar to C++. That is because many of Java's language constructs are not similar to C++. Despite the superficial similarities, Java and C++ are quite differe...

I'm getting some weirdness when I'm casting a Dynamic Proxy Class to the object I want it to be. At runtime, under certain conditions, I receive a ClassCastException. In order to explain this better, here are the definitions for the classes/interfaces I want to use. Brackets have been put around any extended interfaces that (should be) irrelevant. public interface CommandSender (extends Permissible) public interface ConsoleCommandSender extends CommandSender, (Conversable) public interface Player extends (HumanEntity, Conversable), CommandSender, (OfflinePlayer, PluginMessageRecipient) Full Javadocs can be found here: Now, here is the code for my proxy class: public class CommandSignsMessagingProxy implements InvocationHandler And here is a fully working instance of the class: Player proxy = (Player)CommandSignsMessagingProxy.newInstance(player, false); proxy.sendMessage("Hi! Silent is turned off, so you can see this!"); proxy.setOp(true); proxy.other_stuff(); Yet, this one doesn't work: ConsoleCommandSender ccs = plugin.getServer().getConsoleSender(); CommandSender cs = (CommandSender)CommandSignsMessagingProxy.newInstance(ccs, false); At run time, this example would produce the following: java.lang.ClassCastException: $Proxy18 cannot be cast to org.bukkit.command.CommandSender The created proxy class need to pass the interfaces it suppose to implement, return Proxy.newProxyInstance( sender.getClass().getClassLoader(), sender.getClass().getInterfaces(), new CommandSignsM...