On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 at 14:29:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Thanks for the DIP, I saw it since a couple days ago.
Dynamically-verified lazy initialization is difficult, but
doesn't cover:
1. Reference count updates (as you mention)
2. The reference to the allocator is essentially a mutable part
of an object that's otherwise constant.
So it seems to be DIP85 is solving a quite narrow problem, and
one that doesn't address the issue at hand.
I know, I wrote the DIP before I read this thread, and it was
originally only supposed to address lazy initialization
specifically. Maybe some of the ideas can be reused for a more
general un-const concept, though.
