const a storage class or a type modifier?

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Friday 26 November 2010 10:24:02 Trass3r wrote:
> > I don't really have a preference. Note that for function arguments, you
> > 
> > can also use 'in' to mean const:
> > 	void foo(in int*, char *, in float*);
> 
> Isn't "in" the default (even if nothing is specified)?

No. in is the same as const scope. If in were the default, all function 
parameters would have to be const or immutable (since you couldn't ever unmark 
them as const - though marking them as immutable would override const).

- Jonathan M Davis