On Mon, 23 Feb 2015 09:12:33 +0000, rumbu wrote: > On Saturday, 21 February 2015 at 15:26:28 UTC, ketmar wrote: >> On Sat, 21 Feb 2015 08:27:13 +0000, rumbu wrote: >> >>> My question was not how I do this, I know already. My question was if >>> there is another way to safely call a non-const instance function on a >>> const object. >> >> is there a way to been safely hit by a truck? > > I thought if there is some language construct similar to @trusted for > @safe, applicable to const member functions. You can be safely hit by a > truck if I tell you that there is no truck around :)
do not make it `const` at all. i see something very strange in making something `const` just to find the way to remove constness. just stop writing C++ code in D.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature