Re: Task interface and entries with aliased parameters

[Hadrien Grasland <hadrien.grasland@gmail.com>]

> He possibly meant Java interfaces as opposed to existing Ada 95 abstract
> types. Ada 95 abstract type did everything Java interface do and more.
> 
> Interface as a separate type is indeed worthless. Interface as properties
> of a type, a package, a subroutine is more than useful. It is impossible to
> program anything without the concept of the interface.
> 
> If Ada were a better language you would be able to strip the implementation
> from any type:
> 
> Interface = Type - Implementation

I like the idea of interfaces as separate types because it solves all the problems of multiple inheritance, and provides a very nice way to specify a shared interface to multiple objects and have the compiler enforce that shared interface as the objects are refactored, rewritten, etc.

Regarding the last point, would you mean having a type attribute like Type'Interface, that defines an interface composed of all of the type's primitive operations ?

But if so, is it really reasonable to define an interface from an implementation ? Shouldn't the interface be considered as a separate entity that is shared by multiple types ?