Could const/invariant be optional?

[Craig Black]

"Janice Caron" <caron800 at googlemail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.247.1206734444.2351.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
> On 28/03/2008, Craig Black <cblack at ara.com> wrote:
>> I think most would agree that const is more useful for some programs, but
>>  more of an annoyance for others.  Could the const be disabled by a 
>> compiler
>>  option?  If I disabled const when compiling a source file, I could still
>>  rely on libraries that supported const, but I could write code as if 
>> there
>>  were no const constraints.
>
> I don't see how that would work. If I wrote
>
>    void f(C c)
>    {
>        /*code*/
>    }
>
>    void f(const(C) c)
>    {
>        /*different code*/
>    }
>
> and you "disabled const", wouldn't that make the above code a compile
> error (function defined twice)?

No it would compile.  Const syntax would be allowed, and the ABI 
implications of const would be the same.  Only it would ignore const 
constraints.