DMD svn and contract inheritance

[Stewart Gordon]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>> I'm still none the wiser about why it absolutely has to be done like 
>> this instead of the simpler solution I proposed years ago.
> 
> Can you refresh my memory?

Seems straightforward to find to me, but here it is:

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/31595.html

> (The nested function approach is fairly simple in terms of lines of code 
> to implement.)

I can imagine how it works now.  Essentially it's a function that can 
act as a nested function to the function for which it is originally 
defined or any override of it, which works since a nested function is 
really just a function with a pointer to the outer function's stack 
frame as a parameter.  Correct?

BTW I just rediscovered this old thread

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/9775.html

which is making me think we probably ought to enable contracts on 
bodyless functions some time.

Stewart.