http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1835
Christian Kamm <kamm-removet...@incasoftware.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC| |kamm-removet...@incasoftwar | |e.de Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #7 from Christian Kamm <kamm-removet...@incasoftware.de> 2010-07-24 09:15:23 PDT --- Yes, it looks like template this parameters cover this use case. You can even express the contract of a clone function nicely: class B { T clone(this T)() { return (cast(T)this).cloneImpl(); } B cloneImpl() { return new B; } } class D { override D cloneImpl() { return new D; } } If the user forgets to provide cloneImpl or doesn't make it return the correct type, the compiler will complain. At least as long as clone!(D) gets instantiated somewhere. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------