const debacle

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Janice Caron" wrote
> On 24/03/2008, Bill Baxter wrote:
>>  As time wears on I find myself not becoming any more enthusiastic about
>>  const in D...
>>  All I wanted was a simple way to avoid simple mistakes in my code.  Not
>>  a complicated way to avoid complicated mistakes.  And certainly not a
>>  complicated way to avoid simple mistakes.
>
> The feature which is being requested, and rejected, is *not available
> in C, or C++, or any other language of which I am aware*.
>
> Therefore, the fact that it's also not available in D is hardly a 
> criticism!

I don't know that anyone has said it's rejected.  It's just not accepted yet 
:)  Nobody has proven to anyone that this functionality is incorrect or can 
be implemented using the current const regime.

That it is not available in C or C++, or "C++ has the same problem" is not 
an argument against anything.  D has plenty of things that C++ does not 
have, and all for the better IMO.  This is my attempt to plug what I see is 
a hole in the current const implementation.  With this hole, const becomes 
less useful, and therefore will be used less, which makes it more of a 
burden on the coder instead of a benefit.

-Steve