http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1918
Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #6 from Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> 2012-01-22 00:14:21 PST --- Why would it be useful to have a non-virtual function listed as a virtual function? Because that's what you're doing when mark a function which doesn't override anything final. It's _not_ in any kind of override chain. Imagine for a moment that private functions become virtual by default like TDPL says (which I still hopes doesn't happen, since it'll be a major blow to the efficiency of the language) and final functions which didn't override anything were listed as virtual functions, pretty much _every_ function would then be returned by getVirtualFunctions. If you're using getVirtualFunctions or getVirtualMethods or whatever, then you want the _virtual_ functions. As such, I see _zero_ reason to be returning final functions which don't override anything, and so I see no reason to keep getVirtualFunctions around. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
