Remove virtual keyword

[9rnsr]

I don't think it is really necessary. Adding new keyword is always sensible, so we should think more better way (eg. default(virtual): default(final):, etc)

[yebblies]

so we should think more better way

Meh. I disagree.

Also, do not revert changes by commenting out code like this.

[ghost]

Adding new keyword is always sensible

Not in this case. The meaning of virtual has been known for decades, adding completely new syntax makes no sense.

[andralex]

We're converging on final(false).

[IgorStepanov]

We're converging on final(false).

May be we should introduce uniform syntax for cancelling attributes (including UDA). I suggest to use @!sym notation for do this. E.G.

class Foo
{
final:
    // my final methods
@!final:
    // my virtual methods
@MyUDA:
    // symbols with MyUDA attribute
@!MyUDA: 
    // symbols without MyUDA attribute.
}

Same for @safe/@!safe, nothrow/@!nothrow and the other ones.

[mihails-strasuns]

For UDA's it does not make sense because they don't have any semantics of their own and user code can implement anything it wants.

For @safe there already exist @system. @nothrow is only one missing counter-part I think.

[ibuclaw]

May be we should introduce uniform syntax for cancelling attributes (including UDA). I suggest to use @!sym notation for do this. E.G.

No

[andralex]

@IgorStepanov the point there was that you can pass any compile-time computable Boolean, so the approach generalizes well.