# Specialization on vararg of types

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/specialization-on-vararg-of-types/108251>\
**Category:** General Usage\
**Tags:** question\
**Created:** [January 2, 2024, 9:18am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/specialization-on-vararg-of-types/108251 "2024-01-02T09:18:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 10

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Benny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/49beb7/32.png) [@Benny](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Benny)\
**Post date:** [January 2, 2024, 2:07pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/specialization-on-vararg-of-types/108251/10 "2024-01-02T14:07:49Z")

</div>

> [@nsajko](#):
>
> `Test.detect_unbound_args` warns about this method because the static parameter is not always fully constrained

Is it possible that this unorthodox feature is also a bug because of this? Would be a shame considering we don’t have alternatives this deep into the type system.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/specialization-on-vararg-of-types/108251)._