Constness Naming Proposal

[BCS]

Reply to Daniel,

> The problem is that they all mean (roughly) the same thing.
> 
> I mean, *why* is 'resolute' head const whilst 'intransigent' tail
> const?
> 
> I think the current words being used are fine since, let's face it, I
> don't think there *are* English words for "head is read-only" and
> "tail is read-only".  In the end, we'll have to pick a set of words
> arbitrarily and *assign* them that meaning.
> 
> const(head) and const(tail) wouldn't go down too well since, as Chad
> noted, they're too long and a pain to type.
> 
> -- Daniel
> 

how about for head const use "bound": the thing is permanently 'bound' to 
something (but that something might not be const

as for tail const... Don't know