I supported covariance of return types. Please check it.
2010/9/24 kenji hara <k.hara...@gmail.com>: > Thanks very much! > >> If you agree, I am committed to advocate adopting this abstraction for >> Phobos in module std.typecons, with credit. > Of couse, I agree. > > >> All - a bit of bikeshedding - what is a better name for adaptTo? I know >> there is a consecrated name for such late matching of an interface, but I >> can't remember it. > from here(http://www.coderage.com/interfaces/), I found two keywords. > - Non-intrusive dynamic polymorphism > - Aspect Oriented Programming > How about you? > > > I understood the covariance problem. I think that I should also support it. > By the way, there is a question about this sample code. >> class C >> { >> long draw(){ return 10; } >> } >> interface Drawable >> { >> int draw(); >> } > In my opinion, C can derive from Drawable ideally. > so, it will be satisfied with this code. > > static assert(isCovariantWith!(typeof(C.draw), typeof(Drawable.draw))); > > Correctness of it is like this, isn't it? > class C > { > int draw(){ return 10; } > } > interface Drawable > { > long draw(); > } > > >> The override should be legit. > I will fix them. > > > Kenji Hara >
