On 2012-05-02 20:58, Mehrdad wrote:
Er, I guess I didn't say what I actually meant to say, my bad. x_xWhat I meant that you're assuming that derived classes won't need mutable state in an const method that they overrode.
Yes, that would be the assumption. It's not possible without subverting the type system. It's like saying "I'm overriding this method but I want it to return an int instead of a string". It's part of the interface.
-- /Jacob Carlborg
