Poll: Would you like to try const-by-default or not?

[Johan Granberg]

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:

> This is not a discussion thread.  I think we've discussed enough.  :)
> 
> Basically there are these possible const implementations (there are
> others, but for the sake of simplicitly, I'll keep this poll to 2):
> 
> 1) C++ style const, where you mark anything that should be const as such.
> 
> 2) Parameters are const-by-default, and must be marked mutable otherwise.
> Locals, fields etc. are still mutable by default.
> 
> Walter doesn't want to stray from option 1, because 2 is basically "too
> weird."
> 
> Please reply with your choice, and maybe a small explanation of why.
> 
> I'll start this off by saying I'm definitely willing to try option 2.  I
> never really learned const-correctness in C++ because it looked so damned
> awful.  Option 2 makes more sense to me.

Option 2 sounds like the choice to require less typing and is safer so 2 for
me.