# Specification: Superinterface restrictions are presented in an inhomogeneous manner #35609

Open
opened this Issue Jan 9, 2019 · 0 comments

Projects
1 participant
Member

### eernstg commented Jan 9, 2019

 The language specification states that it is an error if an enumerated type or a type variable and several other things occur in the implements type list, or as the extends class, or in a with type list, but Null, String, int, and others get the same restrictions by local specifications ("no class can implement ..."). The presentation would be more consistent if we reorganize this to use the same approach everywhere. Maybe: Every type for which there is a special superinterface restriction must specify this in the associated section (so there is a section for Null and void, a slightly broader one for 'Strings', and maybe we'd add some sections). We would then change the specifications in \ref{superInterfaces} etc. to have commentary referring to those other sections, rather than normative language.