> The rest of the article seems to try and affirm the interface argument by jumping into syntax and compilation arguments.
For the purpose of that post I'm loosely defining interfaces as "runtime polymorphism". The article "jumps" into syntax because that's what I'm trying to show, there really is no argument that I'm making about the abstract idea of an interface.
As stated at the top of the article (and in other comments here), if you want vtable style interfaces, you can have vtable style interfaces: just make a vtable and use it, the language won't stop you :^)
> I fail to see how this has anything to do with Zig or abstract ideas of interfaces.
Yep, that's because the article was never about abstract ideas of interfaces. It does pertain Zig specifically because it shows off a new language feature: `inline else`.
For the purpose of that post I'm loosely defining interfaces as "runtime polymorphism". The article "jumps" into syntax because that's what I'm trying to show, there really is no argument that I'm making about the abstract idea of an interface.
As stated at the top of the article (and in other comments here), if you want vtable style interfaces, you can have vtable style interfaces: just make a vtable and use it, the language won't stop you :^)
> I fail to see how this has anything to do with Zig or abstract ideas of interfaces.
Yep, that's because the article was never about abstract ideas of interfaces. It does pertain Zig specifically because it shows off a new language feature: `inline else`.