Bartosz Milewski seems to like D more than C++ now :)

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 9/20/13 10:52 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Friday, September 20, 2013 10:47:15 Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 9/20/13 10:02 AM, Szymon Gatner wrote:
>>> On Friday, 20 September 2013 at 16:57:43 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>>>> If an object is const, then all of its members are const, which means
>>>> that any
>>>> ranges you get from its members will be const, making such ranges
>>>> useless.
>>>
>>> That is so weird to hear considering I added ranges to my C++ code and
>>> my Vector<T>::all() const can easily return non-const range even tho
>>> container is itself const. This kinda looks like D is more limited in
>>> that area than C++... Or I really am not getting something.
>>
>> Yah, it should be possible for a const container to offer ranges over
>> its (non-modifiable) elements.
>
> That's probably easy to do if the container is well-written, because the
> container creates the range. The problem is converting a const range to tail
> const one, which is what you have to do if you ever end up with a const range
> for any reason, and if you're using const much, that's trivial to do
> (especially if you ever have a range as a member variable). Unfortunately, in
> practice, that conversion is quite difficult to do with user-defined types even
> though it works just fine with arrays.

I'm not sure such a conversion is needed all that often.

Andrei