On Tuesday, October 23, 2012 11:47:09 Ali Çehreli wrote: > private member functions are not virtual by the design of the language. > You have to make them 'protected', not private.
Yes, but according to TDPL, it's different for interfaces. It specifically talks about using private with interfaces for NVI. And I don't believe that you can just swap it with protected in the case of interfaces (though I could be wrong - I don't remember for sure). Regardless, it doesn't currently work to use private like this for interfaces in spite of the fact that TDPL says that you can, and I'm not quite sure what's going to happen with that in the future. It's clear that private functions in classes will never be virtual, but I'm not sure that the situation is as clear with interfaces. The relevant bug report: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4542 - Jonathan M Davis
