Why can't we define re-assignable const reference variable?

[Janice Caron]

On 16/02/2008, none <z at gg.com> wrote:
>  So why can't we have both (just as in C++):

This has been covered so many times before, but in summary, allowing
that would completely break the type system.

But I just want to clear up one misconception. You /cannot/ do that in
C++. References in C++ are /never/ rebindable.