Purity, @safety, etc., in generic code

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 20 February 2013 at 08:25:45 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> On Wednesday, 20 February 2013 at 06:00:02 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> As discussed previously, I really wonder hy a const and non 
>> const version of a function can exists in a first place. What 
>> problem does it solve that isn't better solved by inout ?
>
> I use overloading of const/immutable in one of my projects to 
> avoid a string copy when possible:
>
> https://github.com/JakobOvrum/Dirk/blob/master/irc/client.d#L332
>
> Granted, here const does not apply to the implicit `this` 
> parameter, but it is essentially the same thing.

Yes I know that usage. That is different for this, because of 
overload problems. For parameter that isn't really an issue.

As of you case specifically, I wouldn't do that, because you have 
no gain in duplicating the string in the function rather than 
before passing it. I however don't deny that this may be useful 
in some cases. It cause quite a lot of trouble with overloads.