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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.129.125.212 with SMTP id y203mr1503013ywc.52.1501781269695; Thu, 03 Aug 2017 10:27:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.36.122.82 with SMTP id a79mr3403itc.13.1501781269657; Thu, 03 Aug 2017 10:27:49 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.unit0.net!peer01.am4!peer.am4.highwinds-media.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!w51no320410qtc.0!news-out.google.com!196ni1029itl.0!nntp.google.com!u14no233161ita.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2017 10:27:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=204.52.135.202; posting-account=7Oy7OQoAAABhVYFOo553Cn1-AaU-bSfl NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.52.135.202 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: T'Interface attribute From: Eryndlia Mavourneen Injection-Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2017 17:27:49 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Received-Body-CRC: 2505941309 X-Received-Bytes: 2448 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:47579 Date: 2017-08-03T10:27:49-07:00 List-Id: On Wednesday, August 2, 2017 at 11:46:56 PM UTC-5, Randy Brukardt wrote: >=20 > P.S. And as always, explain the problem to be solved as well as the possi= ble=20 > solution. That is always necessary to understand the value of a proposal. >=20 > P.P.S. I personally have never seen a real-world example where an interfa= ce=20 > actually helps. There's lots and lots of book examples and show examples = and=20 > so on, but in practice you end up with only a single implementation so th= ere=20 > really is nothing gained by involving a lot of dispatching calls. Ergo, I= 'm=20 > against anything (new) involving interfaces. YMMV. I use task interfaces in the case in which I have a basic task design that = has certain core functionality and additionally may have any of a variety o= f other functionalities, too. At the point at which I am ready to consolid= ate the interfaces into a specific kind of task, combining the interfaces, = which already have declared the necessary entries (as procedures), becomes = akin to building using Legos. I find this kind of construction most pleasurable to design and implement. = It also is easy to understand.