Ziad Hatahet <hata...@gmail.com> wrote: > Kind of off-topic, but there is a heated discussion on the D language > forums about why having non-virtual base class methods by default is a bad > idea: > > <a > href="http://forum.dlang.org/thread/lfqoan$5qq$1...@digitalmars.com";>http://forum.dlang.org/thread/lfqoan$5qq$1...@digitalmars.com</a> > > Also comes up here: <a > href="http://forum.dlang.org/thread/zkmunpiikmrezbzme...@forum.dlang.org";>http://forum.dlang.org/thread/zkmunpiikmrezbzme...@forum.dlang.org</a>
I've just read the entire thread (~250 posts by now) and the discussion is mainly about pro/cons of breaking changes to the language, not about the feature itself. The conclusion of that thread seems to be - Almost everyone agrees that non-virtual (=final) by default is a _good_ thing. - The lead developers feel that it's not worth a breaking change. - Many users don't agree with that decision. Where did you find a point against non-virtual by default? (Except that it's a breaking change, of course) Tobi _______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
