On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Jonathan S. Shapiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 6, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Come to think of it, how does an interface differ from a full blown > >> object then? > > > > Interfaces consist exclusively of methods. No data fields. > > What you said made it sound like you effectively have at least fields > of reference type: > Very sorry. There is *one* field, which is the existentially encapsulated data that is accessible to all methods. > OK, but then why would you _want_ to use interfaces instead of objects? Perhaps because we don't *have* objects in the C++/Java/C# sense, or because we don't have inheritance and thus need facets. shap
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
