All right, all right! Interim decision regarding qualified Object methods

[bearophile]

Tobias Pankrath:

> Why not drop that requirement? What is the use case of 
> different function pointers for different but equivalent 
> functions? Does anyone depend on this?

It's a requirement that comes from C specs, and I don't know why 
C was designed that way, as usual I am not expert enough. I 
prefer to not change the semantics of D over C unless there is an 
important reason, especially when I don't know/understand the 
rationale of the original C design :-)

Bye,
bearophile