How to break const

Timon Gehr timon.gehr at gmx.ch
Mon Jun 18 09:23:38 PDT 2012


On 06/18/2012 06:12 PM, deadalnix wrote:
> Le 18/06/2012 18:04, Timon Gehr a écrit :
>> It would be better to have 'nostatic' as the keyword for the
>> current 'pure' and 'pure' as a shortcut for 'immutable nostatic'.
>>
>> This would also silence the 'pure is a misnomer' crowd.
>>
>
> I don't really have an opinion on that subject.  I understand the keywork
> choice can be confusing, but the overall design is really nice.

I agree. Some of the keywords are poorly chosen, but this does not have
any actual _practical_ implications for coding. Changing them, however,
does.

It is just frustrating to always be stopped mid-sentence when
explaining the design to someone unfamiliar with it, or even have them
lose interest because they think to have found a 'problem' with it.

There is also a group of one or two guys who cannot mention 'pure'
without also mentioning that they disagree with the keyword choice.

Interestingly, few oppose to 'const'. This is probably because C++ has
paved the way for it.

TL;DR: poorly chosen keywords create needless communication overhead


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list