Why do you continue to use D?

[Stanislav Blinov]

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 at 18:57:41 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:

>>> Which in order for that to happen it needs to be virtual 
>>> function, not a static function.
>>
>> No, that's also not necessary. You can inherit attributes 
>> without making the function defined by the destructor function 
>> declaration virtual. __xdtor still needs to be virtual, but 
>> that appears to be the case already.
>
> How exactly? By having attributes themselves check the 
> attributes for the parent class of the deconstructor?

Attributes can't check anything, they're attributes :) The 
compiler should statically check your destructor against those of 
members (if any) and a paren't class (which has already gone 
through the same check). I.e. you simply shouldn't be allowed to 
derive a class that has less strict attributes than the most 
strict intersection of the above. If any member has a @nogc 
destructor, the class would have to have a @nogc destructor as 
well. Same if a parent has a @nogc destructor.
This way would ensure that you could destroy objects of derived 
classes even via a reference to base class without violating 
attributes, as such class definition simply would not have 
compiled.