http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6856
--- Comment #6 from [email protected] 2011-11-01 05:59:14 PDT --- (In reply to comment #4) > BTW, "in" contracts seems to be very ill defined, because overriding a method > with an "in" contract without specifying an "in" contract should inherit the > contract from the base class/interface, not remove the contract completely. > You > have to repeat the contract from the base class manually, that sucks. There > should be some syntax to remove the contract instead, maybe something like: > > void f() > in delete > body > { > // ... > } I think it should just look like this: override void f() in{}body{ // ... } If no explicit contract is added, it should be inherited. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
