FAQ
I searched around a bit but couldn't find any discussion on this.

What is recommended, giving an interface with a package, even if the
package doesn't use it itself, or let the callers define the interface?

My specific case is a thing A that exposes a couple methods and a Close().
Then thing B uses thing A but dynamically opens and closes them.

First instinct was that I could provide an interface Aer in the A package
that doesn't include the Close() and then B define an interface ACloser in
the B package as well as a ACreator which defines a Create() (ACloser,
error).
So that is two new interfaces in B and an interface in A, and in my unit
tests it becomes a bit silly.

So this really boils down to, should we include Close() (and perhaps New())
in interfaces? And should the interfaces be in the calling code or
implementing code?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts

Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 1 of 4 | next ›
Discussion Overview
groupgolang-nuts @
categoriesgo
postedFeb 1, '16 at 10:47p
activeFeb 4, '16 at 3:49p
posts4
users2
websitegolang.org

2 users in discussion

Jonathan Gaillard: 2 posts Henry: 2 posts

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase