Talk:Interface (computing): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 07:00, 10 October 2011

Latest revision as of 19:12, 21 September 2024

(25 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{WikiProject Computerbanner shell science|class=stubC|importance1=low}}

{{WikiProject ComputingComputer science|class=stub|importance=mid|hardware=yes|hardware-importance=midLow}}

{{WikiProject Computing|importance=Mid|hardware=yes|hardware-importance=mid}}

{{IEP assignment}}

}}

==Interface as a...==

Previous text said "interface is a software component", new one says "interface is a specification". The former may be awkward, but the latter is not good either. Specification is too vague, could be a paper document or a description in some logic language that is not understood by the compiler. Whereas an interface (in this sense) is specifically a file that is parsed by the compiler when compiling any client module, and is part of the software's source. So, is there a better term?<br>[[User:Jorge Stolfi|Jorge Stolfi]] 06:22, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

: That's the point: an interface ''need not'' be defined in the source code. An interface is not always a file that is parsed by the compiler.

Line 31 ⟶ 32:

Anyone care to explain?

[[User:Supermagle|Supermagle]] 07:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Tamil language [[User:Maris.g|Maris.g]] ([[User talk:Maris.g|talk]]) 11:36, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

==A piece of 'software' is provided access to computer resources ==

Line 42 ⟶ 45:

: [[Interface (object-oriented programming)]] has been appropriately renamed [[Protocol (object-oriented programming)]], and as such should not be merged into this article. Interfaces and protocols are related but quite different concepts: Protocols are one way to implement interfaces, but by no means the only way, and protocols also have some uses beyond implementing interface. See for example the interview of scientist [[Erich Gamma]] at [http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/designprinciples.html], where he makes a clear distinction between interfaces as described on this page (referred to as "interfaces" in the interview) and protocols as described in the Protocol page (referred to as "Java interfaces" in the interview because Java uses the term "interface" as a keyword for its implementation of protocols and the the interview was meant for an audience of Java programmers). [[Special:Contributions/173.226.146.65|173.226.146.65]] ([[User talk:173.226.146.65|talk]]) 23:38, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

:Do not merge, the java definition of interface causes confusion here, however looking at the objective-c definition of a protocol clears things up. In c and varients an interface is a set of exposed symbols usually declared in a .h file. The compiler ensures that these sybols are available to the linker, so that other programs may link against, and therefore interface to the compiled object. Conversly a protocol requires that an object conforming to it implements a set of known methods before the compilation will succeed. This is so that it may act as a delegate for the object calling it, without the calling object being required to know that the sybol in the called object exists, because the protocol guarantees it exists.[[User:Ethanpet113|Ethanpet113]] ([[User talk:Ethanpet113|talk]]) 22:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

== Added material to Hardware interfaces section ==

I agree with Jeh in his reasonings that the edits by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interface_%28computing%29&action=historysubmit&diff=457823369&oldid=457811025 Dhanashreevaidya] on Serial Interfaces and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Interface_%28computing%29&action=historysubmit&diff=457789086&oldid=457782909 Pareenwakde] on Brain Computing are inappropriate in the [[Interface_(computing)#Hardware_interfaces|Hardware interfaces]] section of this article. The Serial Interface material is well covered elsewhere in Wikipedia and is now liked to within the section; the level of detail proposed by Dhanashreevaidya in out of place in this article. Brain interfaces may have a place in this article, which I doubt, but not in the hardware section. [[User:Tom94022|Tom94022]] ([[User talk:Tom94022|talk]]) 16:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

:::FWIW, I put talkbacks on both Dhanashreevaidya and Pareenwakde talk pages pointing to this discussion section. [[User:Tom94022|Tom94022]] ([[User talk:Tom94022|talk]]) 18:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

:: This was added to my user talk page by Pareenwakde: [[User:Jeh|Jeh]] ([[User talk:Jeh|talk]]) 17:32, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

:hello sir,

:I had edited on brain computer interface in the main article interface (computing).A separate article already exists in wikipedia on that.But few things are there which I have added and also I gave the references.But,still it got deleted.During our discussion session I had asked one of the campus ambassador whether we can write on the topics that already exists in wikipedia ,he said we can and so we proceeded.But still there are few things that I have added are new.So please guide me what to be done now. Its getting deleted inspite of rephrasing properly and all. <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pareenwakde|Pareenwakde]] ([[User talk:Pareenwakde|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pareenwakde|contribs]]) 08:42, 30 October 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

Pareenwakde: I'm sorry but as Tom94022 said above your material does not fit well with this article. This article is only giving high-level ideas about the various types of interfaces in computing. It is not supposed to go into extensive detail about any one type of interface. Also, the existing article is about interfaces betweeen hardware components, and interfaces between software components. The user is not a piece of hardware so I don't think brain-computer interfaces belong here at all. They could be covered (briefly) in an article about various types of human interaction devices, including keyboards, mice, speech recognition, etc. Again I say "briefly" because the existing Brain-computer interface article is more than long enough to merit being an article of its own.

Had the [[Brain-computer interface]] article not already existed and had this new material been of sufficient quality, I would have moved it to a new "Brain-computer interface" article. But since "Brain-computer interface" does already exist, and it is already of good quality, that was not a reasonable thing to do.

Your campus ambassador is correct in that anyone anywhere in the world can add material to any existing Wikipedia articles they want. But there is a corollary: anyone else in the world can then edit that material. Your IEP program does not make your contributions somehow immune to editing by those outside of your program.

If you must contribute to Wikipedia as a class assignment I would suggest doing your work solely in a user sandbox. Given your desire to improve an existing article, I would suggest making a copy of the Brain-computer interface article in a user sandbox and then making your changes to that. You can then be graded on your work alone. (However, if it contains copyright violations, those will stil be deleted - copyright violations cannot be allowed to remain on WP, even in "user space" or user sandboxes.) Do NOT then add your material to main article space until you have had other WP editors review it and you have implemented their suggestions to their satisfaction. If you do the result will be much the same as it was here. The [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computing|Wikiproject Computing]] page would be a good place to ask for others to look at your work. [[User:Jeh|Jeh]] ([[User talk:Jeh|talk]]) 17:32, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

:We might consider raising the [[User interface]] article from a "See Also" in this article to its own section with a main article reference but that's as far as I can see makes sense [[User:Tom94022|Tom94022]] ([[User talk:Tom94022|talk]]) 18:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

== Look out for possible copyright violations in this article ==

This article has been found to be edited by students of the [[Wikipedia:India Education Program]] project as part of their (still ongoing) course-work. Unfortunately, many of the edits in this program so far have been identified as plain copy-jobs from books and online resources and therefore had to be reverted. See the [[Wikipedia talk:India Education Program|India Education Program talk page]] for details. In order to maintain the WP standards and policies, let's all have a careful eye on this and other related articles to ensure that no copyrighted material remains in here. --[[User:Matthiaspaul|Matthiaspaul]] ([[User talk:Matthiaspaul|talk]]) 15:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

== Terminology: Method vs Message ==

In "Software Interfaces", there is mention of objects communicating with each other through methods. Is it not "messages" in standard OOP terminology? [[User:Viridium|Viridium]] ([[User talk:Viridium|talk]]) 17:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

== Ambiguity problem in the title ==

{{u|Tom94022}}, there's a problem with your removal of the extended hatnote - the rationale for both reverts just doesn't make sense; "user interface" is not merely a possibility equal to others. "Interface" is a term commonly used to refer to [[user interface]], and is therefore ambiguous with, but not equal to, the concept covered in this article; thus requiring explicit disambiguation. Per [[WP:HNS]], the hatnote should use the form that is clearer and easier for the reader. Per [[WP:1HAT]], a direct link to the other article can be used "if the other article could be reasonably expected by a significant number of readers to be at the title in question", so the link to "user interface" makes sense even if it is also found at the (disambiguation) page. A user arriving to this article looking for user interface will not know that this concept is not covered here unless we explicitly say so.

On a very high level, "user interface" ''could'' be viewed as an instance of computer interface where one side of hardware is of the [[Wetware (brain)|wetware]] variety, but that's not a common view. Given the potential for confusion between the "machine-machine" (covered here) and "human-machine" (not covered here) interfaces, the hatnote requires at least expansion to clarify what the article is not about. [[User:Diego Moya|Diego]] ([[User talk:Diego Moya|talk]]) 10:07, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

:I'm sorry but I don't believe nor have I seen any evidence that the term '''interface''' is more commonly preceded by the qualifier ''user'' than any of the other common qualifiers, e.g., graphical user, network, hardware, software, etc. ''User interface'' is one of the several qualifiers listed on the disambiguation page so specifically listing it gives it undue prominence. Note the article does mention user interface, so I suspect the solution is to add a small section linking to the main article. [[User:Tom94022|Tom94022]] ([[User talk:Tom94022|talk]]) 17:53, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

::The article does ''not'' mention "user interface", the term is located at the See also section only. And you misunderstand the problem. I'm not arguing that "user interface" is ''more'' common that "network interface", "hardware interface"... I'm arguing that it's ''qualitatively'' different, so it requires disambiguation, while the others do not require it as they're instances of the concept described in this article - and "user interface" is not. [[User:Diego Moya|Diego]] ([[User talk:Diego Moya|talk]]) 17:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

:::The article now clearly covers "user interface" as one of several computer interfaces which makes the article now consistent with its title. [[User:Tom94022|Tom94022]] ([[User talk:Tom94022|talk]]) 18:20, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

== Joysticks are not one way only... ==

(at least when they vibrate... and especially with the touch and LCD capabilities of more modern devices). Jus' sayin'... [[Special:Contributions/86.8.54.48|86.8.54.48]] ([[User talk:86.8.54.48|talk]]) 22:25, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

== Gct Coimbatore ==

Very cold climate, nice a moment..... [[User:Maris.g|Maris.g]] ([[User talk:Maris.g|talk]]) 11:38, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

== Touchscreen ==

Isn't there a better example then a touchscreen? Harwarewise the touchscreen consist of two seperate elements, a touch interface and a screen. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/108.171.128.189|108.171.128.189]] ([[User talk:108.171.128.189#top|talk]]) 07:37, 1 August 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== India Education Program course assignment ==

[[File:Wikipedia-Ambassador-Program-Logo.png|50px]] This article was the subject of an educational assignment at Department of Electronics and Telecommunication, College of Engineering, Pune, India supported by [[Wikipedia:Education program/Ambassadors|Wikipedia Ambassadors]] through the [[Wikipedia:India Education Program|India Education Program]]&#32;during the 2011 Q3 term.&#32;Further details are available [[Wikipedia:India Education Program/Courses/Fall 2011/Computer Organization and Advanced Microprocessing|on the course page]].[[Category:India Education Program student projects, 2011 Q3|{{PAGENAME}}]] [[Category:India Education Program student projects]]

{{small|The above message was substituted from {{tlc|IEP assignment}} by [[User:PrimeBOT|PrimeBOT]] ([[User talk:PrimeBOT|talk]]) on 19:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)}}