Fully transitive const is not necessary

[Sean Kelly]

Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> Invariant strings have turned out to be a resounding success (and I was
>>> very, very skeptical of that initially). I suspect that more and more
>>> programs will gravitate towards using invariant as people get more used
>>> to the idea. I know my programs will.
>>
>> Do you have any references to this resounding success?
>>
> 
> I think that what Walter said ("Invariant strings have turned out to be 
> a resounding success") is quite obvious to be true.

A success in what way?  And what do they achieve that could not have 
been achieved via plain old const strings?


Sean