Differentiate const flavors using CASE?

[Ary Manzana]

Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) escribió:
> Derek Parnell wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2007 04:53:26 +0900, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>
>>> Here's a random thought:
>>> What about const vs CONST?
>>> The upcase version obviously being the more const of the two.
>>> The original proposal played with punctuation, and we've talked 
>>> plenty about spelling, but we haven't talked about playing with 
>>> case.  It would be an odd-ball among keywords, admittedly, but if you 
>>> asked 100 people which of 'const' and 'CONST' was the most constant 
>>> you'd probably get 100 votes for 'CONST'.  And he could become good 
>>> friends with foreach_reverse, the other odd-ball keyword who is 
>>> disparaged by the other kids because of his obesity and the big 
>>> staple in his belly button.
>>
>> LOL ... Now that *is* funny.
> 
> Yah :o). Speaking of foreach_reverse, probably it would be wise to lobby 
> Walter to deprecate it in favor of foreach(reverse) (item ; collection) 
> { ... }. The keyword(extra) syntax is definitely becoming a D signature 
> syntax.
> 
> 
> Andrei

I've actually started to like foreach_reverse. I most of the time 
program in Java and, you know, Java 1.5 has foreach:

foreach(String s : words) {
}

I use it very widely, trying not to do a loop with a counter to avoid 
typing more and to avoid bugs. But then I had to write an algorithm that 
iterated the array backwards, and if I only had foreach_reverse the code 
would have been clean and nice...

Of course, sometimes you have to iterate other ways, but foward and 
backwards are way too common.