[Issue 1486] New: Can't implicitly convert char[][] to const(char)[][]

[kris]

Bill Baxter wrote:
[snip]
> I'd like to do more in D 2.0, but if the libraries I need aren't ported, 
> it's either spend a lot of time porting them myself, or stick with D 1. 
>  Right now D1 seems the better option.  But since D1 isn't getting new 
> features I suspect there will come a point when D2 gets something so 
> utterly cool that it's worth doing whatever it takes to use it, 
> including maintaining private 2.0 forks of other people's libraries.  Of 
> course by then they might have already ported... so I might as well wait.

Bill,

If there were a clean way to alias or typedef or macro the D2 const 
features (within D1) then Tango and other libraries would quickly become 
available for D2. In other words, the const features of D2 would have to 
be effectively ignored by the D1 compiler (through whatever means), and 
the use of those features in D2 would have to be 'adjustable' in a quick 
and easy manner (to adhere to syntactic changes). Macros might be ideal 
for such a notion?

Without the ability to retain a single body of source across both D 
versions, and with the syntax of D2 const evolving over time, there's 
little impetus to migrate a library right now