Implicit const

[Craig Black]

"Frits van Bommel" <fvbommel at REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> wrote in message 
news:ft3ndl$2eqg$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Craig Black wrote:
>> Just don't issue the warning if the function is overriden.  The compiler 
>> could be smart enough to do that.
>
> The compiler only looks at the files needed to compile the current module, 
> i.e. all modules imported from it (directly or indirectly).
> So if a method is only overridden in files not imported from the one 
> containing the base class, it has no way of knowing about it...
>
> For example:
> ----
> module a;
>
> class B {
>     int foo() { return 42; }
> }
> ----
> module b;
>
> import a;
>
> class D : B {
>     private int foo_value;
>     int foo() { return foo_value; }
> }
> ----
> While compiling module 'a' above, the compiler doesn't look at module 'b', 
> so it won't know about D overriding foo(). Or even that class D exists, 
> for that matter.

Right.  The D compiler has no way of knowing what functions are virtual 
bases.  But that's actually irrelevant.  Virtual bases aren't the problem. 
It's the override functions that need immunity from this error.  I guess 
what I should have said is:

Just don't issue the warning if the function is overriding another function. 
The compiler could be smart enough to do that.

-Craig