https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3396
Stewart Gordon <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|INVALID |--- --- Comment #4 from Stewart Gordon <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Denis Shelomovskij from comment #3) > This is a documented and intended behavior. According to [1]: >> Functions declared as abstract can still have function bodies. But A.M has no function body. So what's the relevance? >> This is so that even though they must be overridden, they can >> still provide ‘base class functionality.’ But no base class functionality has been provided. As such, the compiler cannot resolve the call to super.M and therefore should error. > It also maches C++ behavior with respect to pure virtual functions. What exactly does the C++ standard say about this? That said, is C++ behaviour relevant? D is not C++. --
