On Saturday, 13 September 2014 at 07:32:23 UTC, Marc Schütz wrote:
I thought it was an error, but then I found this in the
documentation:
http://dlang.org/attribute.html#abstract
"Functions declared as abstract can still have function bodies.
This is so that even though they must be overridden, they can
still provide ‘base class functionality.’"
=> it's intentional
Can != must ;)
Interesting fact, but it still looks like a bug to me. The
contract shouldn't be forcing a body on an abstract method
regardless of whether or not abstract methods are allowed to have
bodies.
