preparing for const, final, and invariant

[Jarrett Billingsley]

"Charlie" <charlie.fats at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:46649DD9.1010801 at gmail.com...
> I'm appalled, both that this is pretty much assured to be in D , and that 
> the community seems to be behind it.  I thought that the reason Walter 
> didn't want const was because of its added complexity , so instead he 
> introduces _3_ new keywords ?  Does no one else feel like this is using a 
> machine gun to kill a fly ?
>
> I understand the need for immutable data when writing libraries, but 
> 'scope const final MyClass myInstance' ?!?  Theres got to be a better way.
>
> I know this sounds over-dramatic, but if this is the direction D is 
> headed, then count me out.  I loved D because if its elegant and powerful 
> simplicity, I think D has strayed way to far from its original goal.
>
> If anyone feels like _this_ implementation for const ( not the usefulness 
> of const mind you ) is not for D, then please speak up or we all might end 
> up losing our favorite language.
>

I was beginning to think I was the only one.  It doesn't seem any easier 
than the C++ style const-ness at all.  If anything it's more complex. 
Instead of "here a const, there a const, everywhere a const * const" it 
seems like it'll be "here a const, there a final, everywhere an invariant 
scope int[new]" :P