From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD, FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,8ddc2f0fbdfbed75 X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII Path: g2news1.google.com!postnews.google.com!cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail From: Maciej Sobczak Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: design changes per Ada 2005/12? Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 14:27:24 -0700 (PDT) Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <456ea895-27c4-4fd7-9a5e-ee4a99984d8f@cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> References: <49b85caa-700c-44c8-8a11-2f512083aca5@r6g2000vbz.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 77.65.97.192 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: posting.google.com 1303594044 14774 127.0.0.1 (23 Apr 2011 21:27:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:27:24 +0000 (UTC) Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: cu4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com; posting-host=77.65.97.192; posting-account=bMuEOQoAAACUUr_ghL3RBIi5neBZ5w_S User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101203 Firefox/3.6.13,gzip(gfe) Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19025 Date: 2011-04-23T14:27:24-07:00 List-Id: On Apr 23, 8:44=A0am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" wrote: > Yes, I have same experience. Interfaces do not work good with generics, > which should not surprise anybody. Agree here. This approach seems to be bearable in Java, where standard collections (java.util.*) are all both generics and interface-based, but I think this is because all this Java stuff is more dynamically than statically typed. On the user perspective, the benefits of these interfaces are close to zero and the very few potential advantages (like the ability to change the concrete collection type without modifying all user code) are more results of Java not having type aliasing (typedefs or renamings) features. C++ uses non-interface approach and I have never seen a situation where this was an issue. Ada got it right, too. -- Maciej Sobczak * http://www.msobczak.com * http://www.inspirel.com