C++

[Tony]

"Deewiant" <deewiant.doesnotlike.spam at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:e83rmr$vi5$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> I've become convinced that the "default everything to const" method seems
>> ideal, but this seems like something that should really be done before 
>> 1.0 if
>> it's going to happen?
>>
>>
>> Sean
>
> I agree. Walter posted somewhere in comp.lang.c++.moderated (I think it 
> was
> there) that he thinks he should have made D like this from the start, but 
> that
> it's too late now. With that, I disagree. We're not at 1.0 yet: it's not 
> too
> late to break even every single line of D code out there.

I too agree.  Making const the default and adding a mutable keyword would be 
wonderful.  This would more than address what seems to be one of the primary 
(and I think quite justified) criticisms of D by the C++ community.

This might also assist a future compiler in determining what operations 
could be done in parallel.

I assumed that the version numbering scheme (i.e. not yet at 1.0) was an 
indication that the language was still in development and might change in 
fairly fundamental ways.

Tony
Melbourne, Australia