• =?UTF-8?B?Ikx1w61z?= Marques" (34/34) Nov 09 2013 Why do abstract methods need to be implemented with override,
• =?UTF-8?B?Ikx1w61z?= Marques" (17/25) Nov 09 2013 Ignore the abstract in the interface, it was a copy-paste bug,

=?UTF-8?B?Ikx1w61z?= Marques" <luis luismarques.eu> writes:

Why do abstract methods need to be implemented with override, 
when interfaces don't? E.g.:

     class X
     {
         abstract void foo();
     }

     class Y : X
     {
         override void foo() {}
     }

vs

     interface X
     {
         abstract void foo();
     }

     class Y : X
     {
         void foo() {}
     }

This is a bit of a problem for a design I'm doing with 
template/mixin magic, making it a bit less magical. If you don't 
want to change this, would you consider at least providing some 
kind of pragma / attribute to work around it? E.g.

     class X
     {
         pragma(nooverride, foo); // this or the following
          nooverride abstract void foo(); // ugly OK, X is hidden 
for user
     }

     class Y : X
     {
         void foo() {}
     }

Thanks! :-)

=?UTF-8?B?Ikx1w61z?= Marques" <luis luismarques.eu> writes:

On Sunday, 10 November 2013 at 02:32:18 UTC, Luís Marques wrote:
     interface X
     {
         abstract void foo();
     }

     class Y : X
     {
         void foo() {}
     }

Ignore the abstract in the interface, it was a copy-paste bug, 
although it seems to make no difference.

BTW, for completeness, I'll clarify that my exact situation is a 
bit more roundabout:

     interface I
     {
        void foo();
     }

     class X : I
     {
         abstract foo;
     }

     class Y : X
     {
         void foo() {}
     }