From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2003-11-20T03:33:12+09:00
Subject: Re: "stereotyping" (was: Re: Strong Typing (Re: Managing metadata about attribute types) )

Hi --

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Sean O'Dell wrote:

> But if something derives or mixes in an interface, then it *does* implement 
> the interface.  The module or class *is* the implementation.  Sure, you can 
> hack it out; that can happen in any language.  I can pass pointers to int 
> where a FILE pointer is expected in C and C++.  That's not the point.

This is similar to Ryan Pavlik's comments to the effect of "Sure, if
you want to write broken code you can change an object's
interface...." :-)  The thing is, though, it's not about hackery or
brokenness; it's about a language design which accomodates dynamic
type (interface) change, and in which such behavior is not
incompatible with the achievement of good, well-designed code.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net