const assignments problem again

[Marco Leise]

Am 07.08.2011, 06:31 Uhr, schrieb Adam D. Ruppe  
<destructionator at gmail.com>:

> bearophile:
>> I agree, that's why I have added two more points
>
> The precedence of the ternary is pretty easy to handle - if there's
> more than one thing in there, just use parenthesis. That's the
> only thing I can think of that would make it any more bug prone
> than other branches.
>
> Perhaps it'd be worth thinking if parens should be required in any
> non-trivial cases.
>
> auto a = something ? "one" : "two"; // ok
>
> auto b = a ~ something ? "one" : "two"; // error, please add parens for  
> clarity
>
>> - It is less maintainable
>
> I don't agree that changing to an if is any burden at all. This
> is like saying "if(x) y;" is unacceptable because you might have
> to add braces later.
>
> Real maintenance headaches are things like duplicated code
> or unnecessary complexity. This is just a very simple case of
> syntax translation.

The anonymous function solution looks good to me. You have full  
flexibility while keeping the variable const and the initialization code  
is at the declaration site.