[Issue 2946] Make 'abstract' mandatory if the class is intended to be abstract

[d-bugmail at puremagic.com]

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2946



--- Comment #11 from Stewart Gordon <smjg at iname.com> 2013-01-21 12:40:39 PST ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> There might be a problem with this since D supports separate 
> compilation. There can be another object file that contains the 
> implementation of Bar.someAbstract. I'm not sure if this applies 
> here.

No, for this to apply, Bar would need to contain its own declaration of
someAbstract.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------