Const vs Non const method

[Namespace via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 10:59:43 UTC, Rene Zwanenburg 
wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 February 2016 at 10:44:49 UTC, Andrea Fontana 
> wrote:
>> Check this simple code:
>> http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/2772c9144f1c
>>
>> I can't understand how to minimize code duplication for 
>> function like get().
>> Of course on real case body is much bigger and complex than 
>> that.
>>
>> The only way I found is to move the body of function inside a 
>> mixin template:
>>
>> mixin template getterImpl()
>> {
>>    auto getterImpl() { /* very long body */ return inner; }
>> }
>>
>> and then:
>>
>> auto get() const { mixin getterImpl; return getterImpl; }
>> auto get() { mixin getterImpl; return getterImpl; }
>>
>> Am I missing something? I don't think it's the right way.
>
> You can do this using inout:
> http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/678cac023051
>
> That getter can be written even shorter due to a quirk in the D 
> syntax, like:
>
> inout get() { return inner; }
>
> But I prefer to explicitly state inout for every parameter and 
> return type.
>
> inout is kind of a wildcard for mutable, const, and immutable. 
> You can also add it to your function parameters, for example:
>
> inout(int[]) doSomething(inout(SomeClass) c);
>
> So the constness of doSomething's return type depends on the 
> constness of the passed argument.

What would be the C++ way? Is there any comfortable way to solve 
this problem in a nice way like D?