const/immutable member functions

[spir]

On 01/24/2011 07:36 PM, bearophile wrote:
> What other people think about this situation? Do you want const/immutable to be required on the right, or do you prefer the current situation, or do you prefer some other solution?

Comparing with C-like typing syntax that, I guess, are planned for deprecation: 
C typing is not wrong, ambiguous, just arguably more difficult to decode, and 
unnecessary because we have a better alternative. IIUC, prefixed const and the 
like instead are not only unnecessary, but inherently ambiguous.

Denis
-- 
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com