preparing for const, final, and invariant

[Bill Baxter]

Regan Heath wrote:
> Walter Bright Wrote:
> Perhaps I have missed the discussion (being away for the last 7 months) which discussed why we don't want 'scope const final' applied to implicit 'in' parameters?

Makes sense to me too.  I'd at least like to try it out for a few months 
and see how the shoe fits.  It seems to make a lot of sense.

I found this big thread about "const by default":
http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/2006-July/005626.html

--bb