I think a lot of people here are being confused by all the talk about "implicit interfaces" in the article. It's not actually talking about interfaces in C# at all, just about the old-fashioned way of passing callbacks.
If you consider that a problem, you would also have the same problem in any other language with first class functions. Someone might define a `readSomething(string -> int) -> ...` function. Does that mean everyone who now defines a `string -> int` function must make it suitable for `readSomething`? Obviously not. It's up to the caller to pass correct arguments to the functions they are calling.
Comments
I think a lot of people here are being confused by all the talk about "implicit interfaces" in the article. It's not actually talking about interfaces in C# at all, just about the old-fashioned way of passing callbacks.
If you consider that a problem, you would also have the same problem in any other language with first class functions. Someone might define a `readSomething(string -> int) -> ...` function. Does that mean everyone who now defines a `string -> int` function must make it suitable for `readSomething`? Obviously not. It's up to the caller to pass correct arguments to the functions they are calling.