any news on const/invariant?

[Walter Bright]

Derek Parnell wrote:
> I think that Walter is saying that he (currently), after much thought and
> deliberation, has decided that there is no benefit to any coder in
> implementing the head const paradigm in D. Therefore those unfortunates
> such as myself, that can't yet grasp why there is no benefit, may feel
> obliged to continue asking for an explanation or assistance about how we
> could implement head const without the compiler helping us.

Head const turned out to be an unexplainable, incomprehensible feature.

A feature that is incomprehensible is unusable, unworkable, and a 
complete waste of time. It's also become apparent that a lot of people 
stick with D 1.0, and refuse to move to 2.0, because of the 
incomprehensibility of head/tail const.

Head const (aka 'final'), had another fatal flaw. If you took the 
address of it, you had a const that was not transitive.