Th
On 04/17/2013 09:06 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 4/17/2013 10:41 AM, Jesse Phillips wrote:
I wish to bring Someboddies consern to this form.
What does attribute inference mean for inheritance?
I specifically addressed his concern in the git page:
"This is the same issue as defining a function with 'auto' in one place
and referring to it having a specific type/attribute in another. So I
think all the same arguments and reasoning discussed above apply equally."
Why is this a valid form of reasoning? The signature of a function that
has its return type inferred includes the function body.
Furthermore, it is not the same issue. It is the dual issue. The
distinction is very relevant because pure and nothrow are designed in an
asymmetric way, given inference. Attributes can force the specification
in one direction only (provide more guarantees to callers), but not in
the other one (require less from subclasses).
The concerns the latter can certainly not be dismissed by using the same
arguments and reasoning as for the former without any further examination.
