Persistent list

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 16 November 2015 at 00:00:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> This illustrates a simple procedural problem. The entire point 
> of my posting a simple example of a complete container was to 
> avoid hypotheticals such as this. The code is there and shows 
> that no, physical const does not suffice. At least I don't know 
> how to do it. If you think it does there's one way to show it, 
> it's easy - write the code that does it.
>
> We could sit on our testes all day long, speculate how things 
> ought to work, and feel awfully smart in the process. It's very 
> easy to do. Hell, I've done it more than too many times. What's 
> more difficult is have a positive, constructive approach that 
> builds on a weak solution to improve it. This is the kind of 
> dialog we need to foster.

Sadly, design I would love to see also doesn't seem to be 
implementable but because of different issue - missing scope 
control. I gave a quick go to implement something that shows my 
desired semantics - 
https://gist.github.com/mihails-strasuns-sociomantic/1d7529eef723b1132564 (only essential functionality to show stuff). As you may see it is totally different from your initial proposal - this is why making constructive feedback is rather hard :)

But chosing between breaking physical const via @mutable and 
waiting until we finally get lond wanted scope control tools I am 
very much in favor of the latter.