Transitive const sucks

[Sean Kelly]

Christopher Wright wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote: well, quite a lot, really.
> 
> 
> It seems that you're concentrating heavily on const for objects being 
> able to ensure thread safety and do a number of other optimizations. 
> Basically, as far as the owner of a const reference is concerned, the 
> object and all its methods are 'pure'.
> 
> So, since, for all functions that can be optimized similarly and whose 
> thread safety can be ensured similarly, we will be adding the pure 
> keyword, why not use the pure keyword here?

Now there's an idea.  I like it.


Sean