Automatic method overriding in sub-classes

[Tofu Ninja via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 28 October 2015 at 15:13:40 UTC, bitwise wrote:
> [...]
> I have to disagree with this. A function's meaning should not 
> change because it's definition is removed.

I suppose you are right.

>>>     [...]
>>
>> A.foo() or B.foo() seems to work instead of super.super.foo() 
>> or super.foo()
>
> Ah, ok. I'll take your word for it(on my phone).
>
> I'm wondering if it would be worth it to make a DIP for this. 
> We could sort out the details and discuss the use and ab-use 
> cases ;)
>
> I myself would be a bit reluctant to start on the DIP right 
> this second though, as I don't currently have the 
> knowledge/time to back it with a proof of concept 
> implementation.
>
>    Bit

Yeah I was thinking about making a dip, but lots of dips get 
made. Without a proof of concept implementation, most don't even 
get considered. I have tried to look at dmd's source but have 
really not been able to grok it. I sort of wish there was an 
article written by Walter or some one that was a intro break down 
of dmd internals, maybe with some examples of adding features.