Re: Why do "const inout" and "const inout shared" exist?

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 02.07.2017 10:12, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
So I'd probably still opt for simplifying the conversion hierarchy.

It may indeed be a good idea to completely remove inout from the 
conversion hierarchy in the documentation:

           const       const shared
          /     \      /         \
(unqualified)   immutable       shared

The extended hierarchy can be presented in the inout documentation 
alongside its derivation from the standard conversion hierarchy.