On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 07:24:13 UTC, Stanislav Blinov
wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 October 2018 at 05:40:41 UTC, Walter Bright
wrote:
When Andrei and I came up with the rules for:
mutable
const
shared
const shared
immutable
and which can be implicitly converted to what, so far nobody
has found a fault in those rules...
Here's one: shared -> const shared shouldn't be allowed.
Mutable aliasing in single-threaded code is bad enough as it is.
Could you explain that a bit more? I don't understand it, mutable
-> const is half the reason const exists.
I was thinking that mutable -> shared const as apposed to mutable
-> shared would get around the issues that Timon posted.
