Re: [boost] [interfaces] Boost Interface Library (2004?)

Subject: Re: [boost] [interfaces] Boost Interface Library (2004?)
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-06 17:58:49

On 2/6/2011 4:18 PM, Joaquin M Lopez Munoz wrote:
> Edward Diener<eldiener<at>  tropicsoft.com>  writes:
>
>>
>> On 2/6/2011 3:07 PM, Daniel Larimer wrote:
>>> I recently ran across the unofficial Boost Interface Library
>>> (http://www.coderage.com/interfaces),
>>
>> How are is an interface any different than a C++ abstract class ?
>
> As the concept is defined by the aforementioned library,
> interfaces allow for dynamic duck typing.

It is not your problem but I did not get much of an understanding from 
the OP's original description of what advantages his implementation has 
over using C++ abstract classes to define interfaces. In other words 
what duck typing has to offer in terms of use which makes it better.