Congratulations to the D Team!

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 15:14:19 -0400, deadalnix <deadalnix at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 11/07/2012 20:53, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:21:24 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer
>> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> It also seems to allow abuses. For example:
>>>
>>> class A
>>> {
>>> private int _x;
>>> public @property x() const { return _x; }
>>> }
>>>
>>> class B : A
>>> {
>>> private int _x2;
>>> public @property x() { return _x2++; }
>>> }
>>>
>>
>> Another abuse:
>>
>> const(B) b = new B;
>> // auto bx = b.x; // oops, compiler error
>> const(A) a = b;
>> auto bx = a.x;
>>
>> -Steve
>
> This shouldn't be a compiler error. An object of type B is 100% of time  
> mutable now.

According to my code, b is const, and never was mutable.

If you are saying that I should be able to call b.x, then this proposal is  
even worse than I thought!  I have no idea what const means in this world.

-Steve