On 2015-09-18 17:45, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
That's `export`.
Right, my bad. D has too many attributes :)
--
/Jacob Carlborg
On 2015-09-16 12:36, Marc Schütz wrote:
Wouldn't the following behaviour be more useful as a default?
abstract class Foo {
void bar1() { } // non-abstract, obviously
void bar2();// abstract, because it's in an abstract class
//
On Friday, 18 September 2015 at 13:18:23 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2015-09-16 12:36, Marc Schütz wrote:
Wouldn't the following behaviour be more useful as a default?
abstract class Foo {
void bar1() { } // non-abstract, obviously
void bar2();// abstract,
On 9/16/15 6:36 AM, Marc Schütz wrote:
Wouldn't the following behaviour be more useful as a default?
abstract class Foo {
void bar1() { } // non-abstract, obviously
void bar2();// abstract, because it's in an abstract class
//
On 2015-09-16 10:49, FiveNights wrote:
Every so often I'll get a compiler error that isn't particularly clear
on what's wrong and eventually I'll figure out that what's causing it is
having a function in an abstract class somewhere that isn't defined:
abstract class SomeClass {
int
declare as
abstract void someFunction();
On Wednesday, 16 September 2015 at 09:31:25 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
On 2015-09-16 10:49, FiveNights wrote:
Every so often I'll get a compiler error that isn't
particularly clear
on what's wrong and eventually I'll figure out that what's
causing it is
having a function in an abstract class
