Walter Bright <newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
Logical const means the same value is returned every time, not a different one.
So you would have only pure functions work with logical const? The new keyword 'newlevel' defined earlier could certainly include pure. Also, the compiler could have the automatically generated opEquals ignore fields marked 'newlevel'. This way, logical constness is preserved, no? Going further, one could define mutable state only in (pure) member functions. This state would actually be stored in the object, but would be inaccessible to other member functions, and would not be considered by opEquals. I believe this is the closest we could come to enforcing logical constness. -- Simen
