How to break const

[deadalnix]

Le 18/06/2012 17:28, Mehrdad a écrit :
> On Monday, 18 June 2012 at 15:24:31 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
>> On Monday, 18 June 2012 at 15:21:36 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>>>> So (**IMHO**) if that's really the case, we should really spend some
>>>> time fixing the /design/ of const before the implementation...
>>>
>>> This is mostly about the design of object initialisation.
>>>
>>>> good idea or no?
>>>
>>> Certainly.
>>
>>
>> My initial instinct would be to require a "const constructor" in order
>> for an object to be const-able, but I'm not sure if that would work
>> correctly or not..
>
> Come to think of it, that would play REALLY nicely with 'scope' -- a
> reference to a non-const object can be escaped from a 'const
> constructor' if and only if the reference is scope!
>
> Bingo! Does that work??

Indeed, this should be scope for ctor (avoid partially initialized 
object in 3rd party code) /dtor (avoid resurrection, which is a real 
pain for any GC, and a very good way to ends up with alive object in 
invalid state).