On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 16:19:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
Apparently, it is not. Do you have a reference to Walter's
change regarding `in` becoming just `const`? ...
Unfortunately, `in` was never implemented as `scope const`.
Why would it need to be `const`? Thanks! -- Andrei
What do you mean?
I think `scope` would be enough. People should still be able to
modify the value. -- Andrei
I'm puzzled. I was talking about
https://dlang.org/spec/function.html#parameters : `in` - `const
scope`. Jonathan mentioned that Walter effectively reverted it to
`const`. Petar provided links to that effect. Now you're saying
it should be simply `scope`? %-O
