DMD 2.100, bring ont he attribute soup

[mee6]

On Thursday, 26 May 2022 at 23:25:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/26/2022 3:54 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>> Second, I expect the constraint checked by the compiler to 
>> provide me with useful invariant I can rely upon. For 
>> instance, if some data is immutable, and that it is really an 
>> invariant in the program, then I can know this data can be 
>> shared safely as nobody else is going to modify it.  The 
>> existence of the invariant limits my options on one axis - I 
>> cannot mutate this data - while opening my option in another 
>> axis - i can share this data safely without synchronization.
>> 
>> If immutable instead meant immutable in most places, you you 
>> can mutate it with this weird construct, then it is 
>> effectively useless as a language construct, because it 
>> restrict my expressiveness on one axis without granting me 
>> greater expressiveness on another.
>
> Immutable means immutable in D, all the way. I've fended off 
> many attempts to turn it into "logical const" and add "mutable" 
> overrides. Most of the complaints about immutable and const in 
> D is they are relentless and brutal, not that they don't work.

People avoid const, very easy work around, you don't hear much 
about const other than to avoid it. I guess people don't want to 
optionally force themselves to use something "relentless and 
brutal". The argument can be made for its removal, and it would 
be a boon. So much baggage like 'inout' could be removed. It 
would remove complexity.