Unannotated abstract classes

[Mariusz Gliwiński]

<code>
abstract class Parent {
	abstract void method();
}

class Child : Parent {}

void main(string[] args) {
	new Child;
}
</code>

<output>
src/test.d(10): Error: cannot create instance of abstract class Child
src/test.d(10): Error: function method is abstract
</output>

Is this really what should happen? AFAIK error should be recognized when not 
overwriting abstract method in non-abstract class.

It reminds me C++, but i don't really see a point in doing like that. Don't 
you think it's a flaw?

By saying "Classes become abstract if they are defined within an abstract 
attribute, *or if any of the virtual member functions within it are declared 
as abstract*." you let confusing situations happen. If i wouldn't instantiate 
my Child class, i could easily think, that my Child class is not-abstract, 
ship library, and have a problem.

Well, I'm almost sure there *is* a reason why both languages are designed like 
that, but it would be great to know it.

Sincerely,
Mariusz Gliwiński