• gzp (36/36) Oct 09 2009 I've tried to implement a const, non-const accessor for a class similar ...
• gzp (18/18) Oct 09 2009 It has some bug for sure, or the interface should be reconsidered:

gzp <galap freemail.hu> writes:

I've tried to implement a const, non-const accessor for a class similar to c++:
   a& at(int) const;
   a at(i);

With class it works as expected
class C1 
{
	int a;
	const int foo() { return 2; }
	ref int foo() 	{ return a; }
} 


Than I wanted to do it using interfaces:
interface I1 {
	const int foo();
	ref int foo();
}
	  	  	  
class C2 : I1
{
	int a;
	const int foo() { return a; }
	ref int foo() 	{ return 2; }
}   

but it won't compile (the interface itself compiles but i could not write any
class implementing the interface I1)

When inheriting interfaces do code won't even compile:
interface IConst {
	const int foo();
}

interface IMutable : IConst {
	ref int foo();
} 


The compiler error i get (using dmd 2.032 on windows):
t2.d(71): Error: function t.IMutable.foo of type ref int() overrides but is not
covariant with t.IConst.foo of type const int()
t2.d(90): Error: function t.C2.foo of type ref int() overrides but is not
covariant with t.I1.foo of type const int()

Is it a normal behavior, a bug or i've missed something ?

Thanks

gzp <galap freemail.hu> writes:

It has some bug for sure, or the interface should be reconsidered:

interface I1 { int foo(); }
interface I2 { const int  foo(); }

class C1 : I2,I1{
 int foo() { return 0; }
 const int foo() { return 1; }
}

class C2 : I1,I2{
 int foo() { return 0; }
 const int foo() { return 1; }
}

C1 won't compile, while C2 compiles. 
For me it is quite strange why are the 2 cases distinct. The order of
inheritance should be identical and if the interfaces defines the same
members(functions), than only the same implementation should apply for both
interfaces.ex:
interface A {  void foo() }
interface B { void foo() }
class C { void foo() {...}  // implementation of both interfaces }
(I think in Java it works this way)



Tanks,