"Nick Sabalausky" <a...@a.a> wrote in message news:hnh4kl$1iq...@digitalmars.com... > "Trass3r" <u...@known.com> wrote in message > news:op.u9i1zxqa3nc...@hoenir.fem.tu-ilmenau.de... >> so you don't accidentally override a base class method without knowing >> it. > > I read about "override" when I first got into D way back before D1.0 and > thought it sounded great. Then I promptly forgot about it since the > compiler never complained, and I haven't even thought to use it since. I > suspect I'm not the only one that's happened to. > > Therefore, if there's potential benefit to be gained from "override" (and > I believe that there is), then I don't think we're actually *getting* much > of that benefit as things currently are. Although, as far as whether or > not that benefit is worth the bother of it being required, well, I haven't > given any thought to that in a long time, so I'm really not sure either > way, ATM.
Although, I will say that Haxe requires "override", and I've been writing a lot of Haxe lately, and I've never found it annoying there (other parts of Haxe I've found annoying...but not that ;) ).