http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9978
--- Comment #2 from Damian <[email protected]> 2013-04-22 11:03:58 PDT --- (In reply to comment #1) > I would tend to think this is allowed. Imagine if you switched an interface > to > an abstract base class or vice versa, you wish to make someone go through all > their calls and add/remove override? > > I had a bug fixed a long time ago, issue 2524. > > In a comment, Walter said: > > "This is a compiler bug. You can override an interface function." > > I'm assuming this still applies today. That's precisely what I was doing when I stumbled upon this, changing a abstract class to a interface. I'm not sure why both are allowed, even though it does no harm to keep both, it seems one should be the right way and the other a warning possibly? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
