On Tuesday, 29 January 2013 at 09:50:37 UTC, bearophile wrote:
deadalnix:
Well I think the error message you propose isn't possible as
it would cause many problems in generic code.
Please, add one or two of such troubled cases in the issue
thread:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9422
Bye,
bearophile
For what it's worth, I think 9422 is better than 4070. You rarely
see const on the return type without also putting it on the
function too, so this should catch *most* accidental usage.
It also still allows the syntax for those that enjoy qualifying
everything on the previous line:
//----
pure @property @safe const
int foo()
{
......
}
//----
