On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:07:34 +0900, Weirich, James wrote:
> I haven't decided whether I like this or not.  Right now I'm kinda
> neutral. It avoids the problem of decreased flexibility at the cost of an
> extra line of code.

I don't like it because it's an empty promise.

  class Foo
    interface IO
  end

Now, if I try to use Foo somewhere, I've promised that it can do IO -- but 
it can't. I haven't implemented any of the methods required to do so.

It also doesn't get us any closer to the concept of signature metadata, 
which despite my misgivings about wanting "contractual obligations", I 
believe Ruby needs for exposing programs to non-dynamic languages over wire 
protocols.

-austin
--
austin ziegler    * austin / halostatue.ca * Toronto, ON, Canada
software designer * pragmatic programmer * 2003.11.20
                                         * 19.19.29