Logical const

Walter Bright newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Mon Nov 29 15:01:05 PST 2010


Simen kjaeraas wrote:
> I am not convinced that such an extension of the type system should be
> made, but I believe you are wrong in that it is not verifiable. but
> please, do show me my mistake.

It is not verifiable because nothing prevents you from assigning:

    m = random();

That is not logical const.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list