any news on const/invariant?

[David Gileadi]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Janice Caron wrote:
>> On Nov 27, 2007 9:13 AM, Walter Bright <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> Think of it this way:
>>>
>>>         const A f()
>>>
>>> means:
>>>
>>>         const (A f())
>>>
>>> which applies the const to the function f, not A.
>>
>> Ah, but the natural interpretation of const(...) is that /everything/
>> inside the brackets is const. Thus, if I write
>>
>>     const(void f(char[] b))
>>
>> that "suggests" to me that b is const, since it is inside (albeit
>> deeply inside) the const(...) brackets. But I only want f's "this" to
>> be const, not b. Perhaps this is a case where "const at the end"
>> creates a more helpful mneumonic?
> 
> 
> What if it were
> 
>     const() A f() {...}
> 
> or  const(this) A f() {...}
> 
> ?
> 
> --bb

While maybe a bit of typing, I really like the const(this) form--its 
intent is very clear IMHO.  And

const(this)
{
     int foo();
     int bar();
}

isn't too bad either.