Fully transitive const is not necessary

[Janice Caron]

On 05/04/2008, Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>  In fact, to get technical,
> it should be:
> pure int f(invariant Class c);

I wondered about that.

It seems to me that if /all/ of the parameters, /and/ the return value
/must/ be invariant (or implicitly castable to invariant, e.g. int)
then couldn't

    pure R f(A a, B b, C c, D d)

be syntactic sugar for

    pure invariant(R) f(invariant(A) a, invariant(B) b, invariant(C)
c, invariant(D) d)

? (Especially what with "invariant" being a nine-letter keyword and all!)