Extended Type Design.

[Carlos Santander]

Walter Bright escribió:
> Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email) wrote:
>> kris wrote:
>>> So, "invariant" is already a keyword ... what about that?
>> I completely missed that one. I think it's a good idea to look into it 
>> as a candidate for a qualifier name. Thank you.
> 
> I agree. I think:
> 
> final
> const
> invariant
> 
> for the three cases looks pretty good.

I haven't finished reading everything on this thread yet, so I don't know if 
this has been asked. Also, I'm failing to fully understand this, but I still 
have this question: how would the following be understood by the compiler?

class A
{
	invariant
	{
		int a = 4;
		float b = -10;
	}
}

What is that? A class invariant or two invariant class members? (If the latter 
even makes sense at all...)

-- 
Carlos Santander Bernal