D const design rationale

[Lars Ivar Igesund]

Deewiant wrote:

> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> Sean Kelly wrote:
>>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>>> I too am disappointed that the only rebuttal from Walter on const by
>>>> default has been "some C++ guys I talked to thought it was weird".
>>>
>>> Same here.  It's an elegant concept and I'd really like to give it a
>>> try.  I think only experience could tell whether it's a practical
>>> solution.
>> 
>> Oh I forgot -- he did give two reasons, actually:
>> 1) some c++ guys he talked to think it's weird.
>> 2) didn't want to have to have a mutable keyword.
>>    (And in some other message later he said something about not wanting
>> 'mutable' in D because it left a bad taste in the mouth of some C++
>> guys.)
>> 
> 
> I thought we had established that "some C++ guys" will always find
> something wrong with any non-C++ language? That's not a good reason for
> anything.
> 

Yep, it's probably the biggest non-reason there is in language design.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi
Dancing the Tango