• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

Nomenclature: Implementing a Generic Interface With Argument?

 
Mack Wilmot
Ranch Hand
Posts: 88
Linux Netbeans IDE Windows
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
What would be the proper nomenclature for implementing a generic interface with an argument instead of a type parameter in a class declaration like this?



I have read where some people call it "implementing a concrete generic interface", but I don't know if that is specific enough because I think the class that implements it would be a concrete class whether the argument was provided or not.

What do you say?
 
Winston Gutkowski
Bartender
Pie
Posts: 10527
64
Eclipse IDE Hibernate Ubuntu
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Mack Wilmot wrote:What would be the proper nomenclature for implementing a generic interface with an argument instead of a type parameter...

I've never really thought about it... "Fixed"? "Typed"?

I have read where some people call it "implementing a concrete generic interface"

Don''t think that's right. After all, it's not really "generic" any more, is it?

Is there any particular reason you asked the question? That might help us.

Winston
 
Mack Wilmot
Ranch Hand
Posts: 88
Linux Netbeans IDE Windows
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Winston Gutkowski wrote:
Is there any particular reason you asked the question? That might help us.

Winston


Because I want to know.
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic