4 ms·
It's not that people are uninterested; it's more that inventing a system for specifying and enforcing these kind of generic interfaces is a really hard design p
by ChrisFoster 8y ago
It's not that people are uninterested; it's more that inventing a system for specifying and enforcing these kind of generic interfaces is a really hard design problem.
As a comparison, consider that the C++ standards body has been working on, debating and serially rejecting the various "C++ concepts" proposals for years now.
- dnbgfher 8y agoThis is not that hard of a problem to solve to a useful level. If you want to get fancier, yeah, it gets hard. But something as simple as a syntax block that lists the interface methods would be enough for now. The fancier stuff is already projected so far out to at least 2.0 that I don't understand why a simple working solution wouldn't be desired for now. It would also simplify the work of changing code later to work with 2.0. I really don't understand how this issue wasn't addressed a long time ago, and why it wasn't a blocker for 1.0.