[Issue 6856] Absence of in() contract (precondition) should mean use default precondition instead of ignore inherited in() contracts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6856 Leandro Lucarella leandro.lucare...@sociomantic.com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|enhancement

[Issue 6856] Absence of in() contract (precondition) should mean use default precondition instead of ignore inherited in() contracts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6856 Stewart Gordon s...@iname.com changed: What|Removed |Added Severity|normal |enhancement ---

[Issue 6856] Absence of in() contract (precondition) should mean use default precondition instead of ignore inherited in() contracts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6856 bearophile_h...@eml.cc changed: What|Removed |Added CC||bearophile_h...@eml.cc ---

[Issue 6856] Absence of in() contract (precondition) should mean use default precondition instead of ignore inherited in() contracts

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6856 --- Comment #30 from timon.g...@gmx.ch 2013-01-21 21:45:01 PST --- (In reply to comment #28) Not sure why this wasn't flagged as INVALID before. But now that the summary line's changed and some comments to the effect of it have been posted,