transporting qualifier from parameter to the return value

[Michel Fortin]

On 2009-12-15 22:41:19 -0500, "Steven Schveighoffer" 
<schveiguy at yahoo.com> said:

> 2. the choice of inout is not my first choice, I'd prefer a new 
> keyword.   The inout compromise was meant to subvert the "we already 
> have too many  keywords" argument (it was Janice's idea).  If there are 
> no objections, I  prefer what the DIP proposed, vconst.  All I'm saying 
> is, reusing inout is  *not* a very important part of the proposal.

Seconded. In fact, we could just remove inout from the keyword list if 
we care about not augmenting the number of keywords.

-- 
Michel Fortin
michel.fortin at michelf.com
http://michelf.com/