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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,dd7bced714e1250a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bob@
Subject: Re: Java interfaces -> ADA
Date: 1999/04/19
Message-ID: <7ff01s$23i@drn.newsguy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 468253792
References: <371AE830.4D8@lifl.fr>
Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://www.newsguy.com]
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-04-19T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <371AE830.4D8@lifl.fr>, "Emmanuel.Leguy" says...
>
>Hello,
>
>Into which ADA feature an Java interface can be translate?
>
 
I guess since an interface says simply that a class that implements it
needs to supply those methods, then in Ada, you would have a number
of abstract methods for the tag record, and then any one who
extends this record, will need to implement those methods since they
are abstract.

a Java interface is also sort of like a C++ class where its methods
are all pure virtual (ie foo() = 0; ) since any class that inherits
that class, will have to implement those methods also.

I think the java interface class is a nicer way of expressing this idea,
and it seems cleaner also. but this is just an opinion.


bob