```d
class A{
~this(){}
destructA(){
~this()
}
}
class B:A{
~this(){}
destructB(){
~this();
~super();
}
}
```
This could allow ```@nogc``` crowd to run destructors without
calling ```destroy```.
Yes, derived to base conversion is still a thing and someone who
invokes the destructor just by looking at the parameter's type
could get fooled, atleast we will have a way to destroy class
instances without the gc.
Are there other problems? I'm genuinely curious.
I guess we can still just define normal methods and invoke them,
but atleast this will allow us to maintain consistency with the
gc crowd.
