I think the ) was in the wrong place here.

[maxvonhippel]

Comparing this line to similar ones, I think the ) is in the wrong place.

In the relatively likely event that I'm wrong, it would be awesome if you could explain why, so I can better understand the code!

Thanks!

---

This change is 

[keilw]

Thanks for the suggestion, which one did you see in a different way? I think it is correct here as it was because otherwise the type is lost in the internal representation.

[maxvonhippel]

@keilw for example on line 241:

public static final Unit<Speed> MILE_PER_HOUR = addUnit(MILE.divide(HOUR).asType(Speed.class), "Mile per hour", "mph");

Here the .asType(...) happens inside the addUnit(...). Is that incorrect? Thank you!

[andi-huber]

The addUnit(...) method just acts as an identity function with side-effects.

So both variants discussed here are correct. The unit's generic type information is lost at runtime anyway: Generic Type Erasure.

You can even omit the asType(...) cast here without breaking anything. We really only use it to remove compile time warnings.

[keilw]

It would not compile without any call to asType or an explicit cast, at least on the outside, so to the outside method signature it seems fine, but we should do it a little more consistently.

[maxvonhippel]

Cool! Thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. I recommend closing this issue, since my PR does not improve anything.