Lazy evaluation

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Wednesday, November 23, 2011 18:41:46 Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 11/23/2011 12:53 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > This basic idea was discussed a couple of months back, and it was
> > determined that it was overly complicated for very little gain.
> 
> I strongly disagree.

Well, you're free to disagree, but that's essentially what the discussion 
resulted. And glancing at the thread ( http://www.mail-
archive.com/digitalmars-d at puremagic.com/msg65324.html ), it looks like you 
posted a couple of times in it, so I'd expect you to be at least somewhat 
aware of what was discussed in it. It's nice in theory, but there are a number 
of complications for what most people consider to be a minor gain. And for the 
folks who really don't like transitive const, it doesn't go anywhere near far 
enough, since they want full-on caching with const, not just lazy evaluation, 
which just isn't going to happen.

- Jonathan M Dav