const, final, scope function parameters

[Regan Heath]

Robert Fraser Wrote:

> Thanks for explaining that to me (I've only ever worked in Java, so const is a foreign concept). Then doing that by default seems like it'd not only break a great deal of existing code, and just sounds weird to me. 

Can you give an example of something you think would break.  When you say break do you mean wont compile, or will compile and behaves differently.  Because, the former is fine as (I'd like to think that) it breaks because it's something that shouldn't be done.  The latter is not acceptable, ever.

>I'm all for explicit "in," but I guess we'll just have to wait and see what Walter decides.

Yep, as always.  (I dont want to imply any dislike about this fact, it doesn't really bother me when Walter makes a decision about Walters programming language which I don't like.. it is after all Walters).

Regan