[amoralis]

martinar_kauaro, why is it bad?

[Gladis]

martinar_kauaro, It does what we want it to do. how is that bad?

[Aaron Zapashniy]

I'd think it'd basically just say "hey compiler, make sure whatever i throw at this method contains Parents in one form or another"

[martinar_kauaro]

amoralis, Because you're again killing the typesafety. I've seen quite some code snippets that relied on generics to find "wrong object type inserted" exceptions.

[amoralis]

martinar_kauaro, no you're not
you should be able to pass in a child class

[Aaron Zapashniy]

If the method in question operates on the param as Parent, what harm could there be?
It'd provide exactly the level of type safety i desire.
(but WOW is that ugly and verbose syntax..)

[Gladis]

Aaron Zapashniy, Well, Java as a whole is ugly and verbose syntax.

[Aaron Zapashniy]

Ah well. i guess i'll just declare my collections with <Parent>.
Thanks fellas.