On Friday, 17 October 2014 at 14:18:31 UTC, monarch_dodra wrote:
On Friday, 17 October 2014 at 00:55:25 UTC, ketmar via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:42:24 +0000
IgorStepanov via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>
wrote:
Can someone comment this code? Should I think that it's a bug.
it's just an anomaly. const postblit can do alot of things
besides
adjusting struct fields, and it's logical that compiler cannot
call
non-const methods for const objects.
yet it's still on of those "unforseen consequences" that
arises from
conjunction of different features.
i don't think that it's a bug, but i think that this must be
discussed
anyway, and then documented.
AFAIK, Kenji has submitted a DIP, and has begun working on
"fixing" the const/immutable/inout posblit issue.
However, there are some very subtle corner cases, so (afaik)
work is slow.
To be honest, I think people use "const" way too much in D.
It's *not* the C++ head const you can use anywhere. It's really
just the "base" attribute between mutable and immutable data.
In particular, due to the transitive nature of const, any time
you use const it means "you can't modify this, or anything
produced or acquired from this, ever". It's usually not what
people think they are signing for...
When it makes little sense to have your type as immutable, then
I don't think you should bother much
What happends if we will ignore const/immutable modifier for
postblits? Is it create any holes?
