On 2011-06-03 23:55, Michael Shulman wrote:
On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Jonathan M Davis<jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote:
And if you don't know about NVI, having a
virtual private function is just plain weird.
Well, it makes perfect sense to me, once given that in D, 'private'
allows access from anywhere in the same module, rather than only in
the defining class. I agree that it's weird and surprising in C++.
Are 'package' qualified functions also non-virtual? The documentation
http://d-programming-language.org/function.html#virtual-functions
says that "all non-static non-private non-template member functions
are virtual", but I get the same sort of linker errors with 'package'
functions that I do with 'private' ones, even with code that's all in one
module.
Mike
The current implementation of "package" is non-virtual and, as far as I
know, has always been like that. What it's actually supposed to be, I
don't know.
--
/Jacob Carlborg
