http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1918
--- Comment #9 from yebblies <[email protected]> 2012-01-24 02:36:20 EST --- (In reply to comment #6) > 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. Well, you make some good points. I'm not entirely convinced there isn't some template forwardingy application (are there any uses for __traits(getVirtualFunctions)?) that would find the other way useful. Anyway, I'm not sure this fix is correct. After a little bit of poking around I discovered that a final method that doesn't override anything IS STILL VIRTUAL. It still creates a vtable slot. Is this a bug? From what I can tell that means there is no way to actually create a non-virtual non-static member function. If final functions that do not override anything were implicitly non-virtual, it would fix this bug. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
