interfaces and contracts - new pattern

[Adam D. Ruppe]

On Tuesday, 3 December 2019 at 14:24:15 UTC, Robert M. Münch 
wrote:
> My point was, when the superclass doesn't has an in() contract:
>
> Error: function contracts.Derived.test cannot have an in 
> contract when overridden function contracts.Base.test does not 
> have an in contract

ooooh geeze I was so focused on inheriting the contract that I 
didn't even test if it didn't have one at all. So we need a 
language change anyway.

ugh.