standard library vs standard interfaces

[kris]

Serg Kovrov wrote:
> kris wrote:
> 
>> FWIW Tango has a handful of interfaces as you describe (such as 
>> tango.io.model.Conduit -- akin to a stream). These were created to 
>> decouple implementation from reference, so that the lib could remain 
>> "loosely bound".
> 
> 
> I'd like to point that I have used I/O interface just as example. I see 
> it to be comprehended hierarchy, that covers every possible generic, and 
> popular domain-specific contracts.
> 
> And second, the very idea of having 'standard interfaces' is to have 
> them not just lose-coupled to particular library, but completely 
> independent. Ideally as part of official distribution, but separated 
> from standard library.
> 

I'd like to think such a notion would be plausible, but it is very hard 
to satisfy everyone's desires. For example, look at the opposing forces 
prevalent in GUI APIs? That doesn't rule out any possibilies, of course; 
but is intended to identify the often strong social and technical needs 
to differentiate :)