shouldn't override be obligatory?

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
news:hnh4kl$1iqo$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "Trass3r" <un at known.com> wrote in message 
> news:op.u9i1zxqa3ncmek at hoenir.fem.tu-ilmenau.de...
>> so you don't accidentally override a base class method without knowing 
>> it.
>
> I read about "override" when I first got into D way back before D1.0 and 
> thought it sounded great. Then I promptly forgot about it since the 
> compiler never complained, and I haven't even thought to use it since. I 
> suspect I'm not the only one that's happened to.
>
> Therefore, if there's potential benefit to be gained from "override" (and 
> I believe that there is), then I don't think we're actually *getting* much 
> of that benefit as things currently are. Although, as far as whether or 
> not that benefit is worth the bother of it being required, well, I haven't 
> given any thought to that in a long time, so I'm really not sure either 
> way, ATM.

Although, I will say that Haxe requires "override", and I've been writing a 
lot of Haxe lately, and I've never found it annoying there (other parts of 
Haxe I've found annoying...but not that ;) ).