Class & interface terminology

[John Rose]

On May 7, 2020, at 3:07 PM, forax at univ-mlv.fr wrote:
> 
> No, i disagree about to things
> - trying to tilt each features to be either an interface or an class is not appropriate

I buy Dan’s argument that since the JLS uses this bifurcation,
it is legitimate to extract more benefit from it in this way.

After all, every type-declaring construct is covered under one
or the other heading (chapter 8 or chapter 9) in the JLS.

> - use classes or interfaces as a kind of composed word with the same meaning as "declared type”. 


As I just said in my previous note, this composed word isn’t
perfect but it is a great improvement over “type”, and I don’t
want a hypothetical best (as yet undiscovered) to be the enemy
of an actual better.

If we can agree on this composed word, it will be progress.
And I think it will sharpen any future discussion of a better
umbrella word.  We are sure to have such a discussion if/when
we introduce templates and/or specializations, which are
like more-concrete, less-erased, less-parametric versions
of generics and their types.

— John