Hi Kevin, Hi all, On Mi, 2016-02-17 at 09:25 -0500, Kevin Gessner wrote: > > I've noticed s pattern in Etsy's code and elsewhere, where a trait > provides a common implementation of an interface. Classes that use > the trait are required to also explicitly declare the interface to > benefit. I propose that traits be permitted to declare and implement > interfaces. Classes that use such a trait would then implement the > interface, as though it were declared on the class, without declaring > the interface explicitly.
While I do see the benefit in that behavior and I admit I sometimes in
the past wished for something like that as well, it's quite implicit as
one cannot see that class "implements" the interface. Which makes it
already less appealing to me.
Additionally, I wonder what the expected behavior would be when it
comes to aliasing, visibility changing and conflict resolving?
Kind regards,
Arne Blankerts
--
Those who do not understand Unix
are condemned to reinvent it, poorly (Henry Spencer,1987)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
