On Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:26:14 +0100, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com>
wrote:
On Tuesday, February 14, 2012 00:15:40 Martin Nowak wrote:
Can you elaborate on what issues you see with NVI. After all it's only
the
final public
method that needs to call the virtual private methods.
As I explain in that bug report, NVI can be acheived with protected
rather
than private. So, we can do NVI now with private being non-virtual.
However,
if we make private virtual, then the compiler can no longer inline
private
functions in classes unless they're marked as final. That's a
performance hit
to pretty much every class ever written.
Yes, the conscientious programmer will mark their classes' private
functions
final unless they intend to use them for NVI, but the _default_ is then
inefficient for little to no gain. All you gain is the ability to do NVI
with
private instead of protected, and that is not even vaguely worth the
performance hit to almost every D class ever IMHO.
- Jonathan M Davis
OK, that was known and I agree with you. I even find the concept of
overriding private
functions flawed. I thought you had something in mind with overload
resolution.
