abstract class member functions can not have contracts

[Timon Gehr]

On 05/15/2013 04:16 PM, ref2401 wrote:
> Interface member functions can have in/out contracts but why abstract
> class member functions can not?
>
> abstract class Base
> {
>      @property int field();
>
>      void foo() in { assert(field > 0); }
> // Error: function main.Base.foo in and out contracts require function body
> // An empty body definition fixes this error.
>
> }
>
> interface IBase
> {
>      @property int field();
>
>      void foo() in { assert(field > 0); } // OK
> }

No reason.

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6549