@disable usage and design

[bearophile]

This is something I have already asked about in D.learn and the IRC channel, with no luck.
This D2 code used @disable:


import std.c.stdio: puts;
class A {
    void foo() { puts("A.foo()"); }
}
class B : A {
    //@disable override void foo(); // Linker error  
    @disable override void foo() { puts("B.foo()"); }; // OK
}
class C : B {
    override void foo() { puts("C.foo()"); };
}
void main() {
    A b = new B;
    b.foo(); // Output: B.foo()
    B b2 = cast(B)b;
    
    // Compile-time Output: Error: function test.B.foo is not callable because it is annotated with @disable
    b2.foo();
    
    C c = new C;
    c.foo(); // Output: C.foo()
}



Is this how @disable is supposed to work (or is it only partially implemented)?

Isn't  @disable override void foo();  more meaningful than giving a body to a disabled function?

As you can see the first call to foo prints "B.foo()", that is calls the disable method. Isn't a runtime exception better in this case?

Is overriding a disabled function meaningful?

Thank you,
bye,
bearophile