Const spec status.

[Janice Caron]

2008/4/29 Bruno Medeiros <brunodomedeiros+spam at com.gmail>:
>  Hum, I feel a bit silly, I originally thought that *all* cases would be an
> error, so maybe it was just I that got confused with a previous version of
> const. (where values could only be assigned to variables with the same
> "head-constness", which is not the case here)

The definition of const hasn't changed. (At least, not recently). It's
just that bugs have been fixed. The compiler is now better at figuring
out what is safe and what is not.

There are still one or two bugs remaining, but as time goes by, we'll
see those fixed too. We have a good system here.