const, final, scope function parameters

[Jason House]

For those of us who haven't read all the threads on this stuff... Is 
there a page I can go to and read about the planned changes to D for 
this stuff?

I guess I wonder which combinations of qualifiers would make sense as 
in, out, and inout parameters.  I'd then try to figure out how one would 
write out any of the variations and try to make the most common ones as 
short and understandable as possible.


Walter Bright wrote:
> It looks like making "const final scope" be the default for function 
> parameters is going to be infeasible. The troubles are that:
> 
> 1) It seems to knock a lot of people for a loop, who will be assuming 
> that an undecorated name would be like an undecorated name for a local 
> or global variable.
> 
> 2) Having to turn off one of the const, final, or scope, introduces the 
> need for some sort of "not" keyword, like mutable, !const, !final, etc. 
> It comes off looking bizarre.
> 
> However, making "in" be equivalent to "const final scope" does seem to 
> work fine, requires no new keywords, and doesn't seem to confuse anyone.
> 
> On a related note, "cstring" has received universal condemnation <g>, so 
>   I'll just have to make "string" work.