All right, all right! Interim decision regarding qualified Object methods

[Mike Parker]

On 07/13/2012 10:04 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 July 2012 at 19:38:03 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> On the other hand, if you're dealing with your own class hierarchy,
>> you can choose what you're going to mark as const or not
>
>
>
> Say person X who develops a class A with a const member similar to
> opEquals or whatever suits your fancy.
>
> Say person Y is using person X's library (person X doesn't even _know_
> person Y, let alone show him the source code), and finds that too
> restricting. It's being "forced onto them".
>
>
>
> Could you tell me how this situation is different from the above?
>
> How is person Y supposed to solve this problem? Modify the declarations?
> cast()?

Again, it's a matter of choice. You can always choose to use a 
particular library, alternative, or implement your own solution. How to 
you choose *not* to derive your classes from Object?