Stick a fork in it

[Don Clugston]

Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> renoX wrote:
>>>> Walter Bright a écrit :
>>>>> Chris Nicholson-Sauls wrote:
>>>>>> Actually, that'll be 'final'.  The new 'invariant' will mean "this 
>>>>>> *data* absolute does not change", and the new 'const' will mean 
>>>>>> "this is an *immutable view* into data owned by other code, which 
>>>>>> *may* change".  (If I'm remembering/understanding right.)
>>>>>
>>>>> You're right.
>>>>
>>>> If the keywords are really like this, it's a bit weird, IMHO the 
>>>> most interesting one is 'invariant' which happens to be also the one 
>>>> with the longest name..
>>>
>>> But invariant is also the one most likely to appear on a line all by 
>>> itself with just a single variable and a simple initializer.  And 
>>> most uses will be close to the left margin I suspect.  And even if 
>>> invariant is the most interesting, I think const will still be the 
>>> most used.
>>
>> I still can't keep all these straight in my head--the words are all 
>> synonyms.  Hopefully that will change after I've used them a bit.
>>
>>
>> Sean
> 
> I think I've just about gotten my head around it, but also feel it will 
> come moreso with use.  I think of the word invariant as a "stronger" 
> word than const(ant) -- the latter being a more common term, and the 
> former more... formal -- so that's how I deal with it; ie, that 
> 'invariant' is a "stronger contract" than 'const' is.  At least my time 
> with Java semi-prepared me for 'final'.
> 
> -- Chris Nicholson-Sauls

Mentally, I can cope with const if I view it as abbreviation of 
'constrained' (if you think of it as 'constant', IMHO it gets horribly 
nonintuitive). It's obvious that 'invariant' is an extreme case of 
'constrained'.