On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 5:47 AM, Tony Marston <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Robert Cummings" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > While I agree that Interfaces are mostly a lot of extra code, I have to > > also say that they are there primarily to enforce a contract between the > > user of the interface and their classes that claim to implement the > > interface. If someone creates a class that "Implements" an interface, > > then when I have to go edit or use the class, it had better damn well > > implement what it says it does :) > > "enforcing a contract" is a lot of maningless gobbledegook. The simple > fact > is that it is possible to have an interface without ever using the term > "interface". Nothing extra is added by using the term "interface" (except > for effort) so there is absolutely no advantage in doing so. That is why I > say that the term "interface" is a waste of effort as absolutely nothng is > gained. can u say dejavu ?? lets c if we can get another 100 post thread going like we did last year :D this is turning into a dup. -nathan
