duck!

[Leandro Lucarella]

Andrei Alexandrescu, el 16 de octubre a las 19:19 me escribiste:
> >I hate myself, I just keep replying when I know this matter is closed,
> >if both you and Andrei like something, is a dead end for any
> >alternatives...
> >
> >Well, at least I will be able to say "I tried"...
> 
> How about this: we call "adapt" the strict adaptation of one
> interface to another and "ducktype" the loose adaptation that might
> fail dynamically. Would that float your boat?

I don't find it ideal, but it's definitely better.

What I don't get is what the purpose/use of "ducktype" in D. And why do
you even have to pass a type to ducktype? If you aren't certain if the
object implements a function or not, that's not really duck-typing
either, that's just dynamic typing and in that case, why do you even
bother to specify an interface?

I really don't see a point to it...

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
at ease, eating well (no more microwave dinners and saturated fats),
a patient better driver, a safer car (baby smiling in back seat),
sleeping well (no bad dreams), no paranoia,