Here is the test code:
--
class A {
  bool f1() { return false; }
  bool f2(T)() { return false; }
}

class B : A {
  bool f1() { return true; }
  bool f2(T)() { return true; }
}

void main()
{
  A a = new B;
  assert(a.f1()); // OK
  assert(a.f2!(int)()); // assert error
}
--
Is it a regular behaviour? And what should I do to implement a virtual templated method?

thanks
p.s. dmd-2.0.16

"baleog" <maccarka@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:g5lmu2$2del$1@digitalmars.com...
> Here is the test code:
> --
> class A {
>  bool f1() { return false; }
>  bool f2(T)() { return false; }
> }
>
> class B : A {
>  bool f1() { return true; }
>  bool f2(T)() { return true; }
> }
>
> void main()
> {
>  A a = new B;
>  assert(a.f1()); // OK
>  assert(a.f2!(int)()); // assert error
> }
> --
> Is it a regular behaviour? And what should I do to implement a virtual templated method?

Yes, all templated methods are implicitly final (non-virtual).

There is no way to have a virtual templated method.  It would not be possible to implement, since there can be any number of instantiations of the method.

Reply to Jarrett,


> There is no way to have a virtual templated method.  It would not be
> possible to implement, since there can be any number of instantiations
> of the method.
> 

It would not be possible to implement *with current linkers*

I can think of some horrid hack's involving using relocations for vtbl offsets and generating object files by parsing link errors (or with a hacked linker) that would let it be done.

OTOH it would break with .so/.dll usage and would generate some really funky build processes.