If you want to do tricky pointer stuff, the Java hack around that is an array that holds the pointer to the value instead; and, autoboxing allows ints into it. It’s a heterogeneous list.
The List<Object> cannot hold int, double etc. It can only hold the boxed variants. Auto boxing takes some of the pain away but it's still not a heterogeneous list which has the requirement that it can hold values of any type.
I'd wager that the up and coming inline classes in java also can't be put into a List<Object> but maybe I'm wrong.
No I don't think so. The main requirement of a heterogeneous list is that it can hold any type. In addition in a statically typed language I'd say to truly qualify as a heterogeneous list it should actually be typesafe. Java fullfills neither requirement.
Seems like the rub is "The main requirement of a heterogeneous list is that it can hold any type." when I think I would colloquially say, and use as a working definition, that they need to hold different types.
Also the rub is that "type" means two things: what a variable can have OR a class (that inherits from `Object`).
Like, chances are, the individual is going to say that Ruby provides that power; but, by the time you've reached Ruby levels of abstraction, the odds of any argument about performance and data marshalling go out the window.
It's a difference without a meaning, as far as I can tell.
If you want to do tricky pointer stuff, the Java hack around that is an array that holds the pointer to the value instead; and, autoboxing allows ints into it. It’s a heterogeneous list.