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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1592759aa83d0d45 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-25 06:11:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: wojtek@power.com.pl (Wojtek Narczynski) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Suggestion for Ada 200x - Interface inheritance Date: 25 May 2003 06:11:05 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com/ Message-ID: <5ad0dd8a.0305250511.7546a071@posting.google.com> References: <0Pxza.699607$OV.652508@rwcrnsc54> <5ad0dd8a.0305240435.337d9373@posting.google.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 62.111.211.178 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1053868266 10975 127.0.0.1 (25 May 2003 13:11:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 25 May 2003 13:11:06 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:37758 Date: 2003-05-25T13:11:06+00:00 List-Id: Georg Bauhaus wrote in message news:... > Wojtek Narczynski wrote: > : > : This AI has a funny title: "Abstract Interfaces to provide Multiple > : Inheritance". Two misconceptions: 1. Interfaces cannot be concrete, > > Well, Java interfaces cannot in a sense be concrete, but there > is more to the term "interface", which is a venerable, general purpose > term dating from before the days of Java speak. Ada is a general purpose > programming language... I get your point, but still I pefer talking about "interfaces" instead of "abstract interfaces", unless one defines what a "concrete interface" is, on the Ada ground. Objective-C has 'protocols' by the way, they are said to be ancestors of java interfaces. Regards, Wojtek