On 22.2.2014. 23:43, simendsjo wrote:
> On 02/22/2014 11:33 PM, Francesco Cattoglio wrote:
> The problem isn't about optional parenthesis or properties. It's the
> fact that
> you can redefine a symbol to be something entierly different, and that this
> difference will only be seen if you are looking at the symbol through the
> "correct" type.
That is exactly what I wanted to point out! I reduced the example code
to make that point more obvious:
import std.stdio;
class A {
string x = "A";
}
class B : A {
// should it be legal to hide a symbol and redefine it to a new type?
int x = 2;
}
//static assert (is(typeof(A.x) == typeof(B.x)));
//Error: static assert (is(string == int)) is false
void main () {
B o = new B();
writeln((cast (A)o).x); // A
writeln((cast (B)o).x); // 2
}
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/6ae4ac5de1bc
