🚀 go-pugleaf

"Laurence V" <o@o> wrote in message news:3d0d962f.216399@news.clara.net...
> >Nothing in particular, it's a general observation related to custom
> >interfaces:
> >
> >interface Intf1{
> >    public void X();
> >}
> >
> >interface Intf2{
> >    public void X();
> >}
> >
> >class MyClass implements Intf1, Intf2{
> >    ????
> >}
>
> It just highlights the importance of choosing method names very
> carefully, especially so in interfaces.
>
> It does not highlight a major problem in the language, as you seem to
> suggest. In 6 years of Java programming I don't recall ever being
> faced with method name collisions due to implementing several
> interfaces.
>
>   L.
>
> ==
> Check out JINX - The Java Information Exchange, http://jinx.swiki.net

Of course it is an ugly problem in the language, even if not a show-stopper.

Just because you haven't encountered one doesn't mean there will never be a
name clash. It doesn't matter how carefully you choose your method names;
different domains use the same word for different concepts, besides which it
is ridiculous to have to tweak method names like "Open" or "Draw" - which
are perfectly fine - just because someone else *might* be using them. Trying
to puzzle out whether or not a given word is in use in some unknown
interface somewhere else on this planet is fruitless. At best you can hope.

Even if name-clashes are rare, it seems to me that there is just no good
reason why a name resolution technique could not have been implemented in
the language.

Regards,
Tristan.