Immutable fields

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2010-11-08 02:13, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 11/7/10 2:40 PM, Stewart Gordon wrote:
>> On 03/11/2010 03:06, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>>> "bearophile"<bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote in message
>>> news:iaqbsb$1d30$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>> Is it correct for immutable struct fields to act like enum or static
>>>> const
>>>> fields? (I don't think so, but I am wrong often):
>>>
>>> immutable struct fields can be changed inside the constructor, so they
>>> must
>>> be non-static.
>> <snip>
>>
>> Const/immutable struct members are an ugly mess, and a big hole in the
>> const system.
>>
>> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2625
>>
>> Stewart.
>
> There are problems with the implementation, not the design. Fixing const
> and immutable will be #1 priority once the 64-bit dmd is off the gates.
>
> Andrei

Why can't we get an official roadmap for this? I thought dynamic 
libraries was next after 64bit.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg