const int vs. int const

[John via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 15 August 2014 at 17:16:45 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
> On Friday, 15 August 2014 at 17:05:55 UTC, John wrote:
>> This may be a silly issue, but I recently read the better 
>> practice is to begin with the variable type followed by const 
>> keyword, but that order doesn't work in D. Is that intentional?
>>
>>  int const minWage = 11; //Error: no identifier for declarator 
>> int
>>  //const int minWage = 11; //works
>
> It is intentional, and I think this "best practice" idea doesn't
> apply to D in the same was as C/C++.  The reason this is an 
> issue
> in C/C++ is because "const char *" is equivalent to "char const
> *", but once typedefs and templates enter the picture things
> start to get confusing.  Since D allows the const qualifier to
> use parens to specify what part of the type it applies to, we
> don't need to support the C style syntax.

Ok, thanks for reply.