On 21/05/2010 19:15, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I'll now slowly answer the great replies I got in this thread, in
chronological order. Since I read them all before replying, I might
sometimes refer to future posts. Hopefully that won't be too confusing.
Andrei
Following the dcollection thread, it seems that your argument is that
Interfaces in a non hierarchical collection library are useless.
Or : Hierarchical collection libs are nonsense and ergo interfaces are
obsolete.
ok Some collection types belong to the same family. So they should be
loosely coupled. How to do that without having Interfaces ?
Next f.i. forwardranges belongs to a certain family of collections. and
Ranges are (or should be) Interfaces.
You see me very confused.
Bjoern
given
struct node
class col : IFWRange
node Node;
// No ?
