On 01.04.2018 19:20, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 3/28/18 7:50 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
"The proposal could be amended to accept mutable ref's depending on
the value-judgement balancing these 2 use cases. Sticking with const
requires no such value judgement to be made at this time, and it's
much easier to relax the spec in the future with emergence of evidence
to do so."
Just get it right the first time. "const" is a serious API
restriction, and it shouldn't be forced on anyone, even intermittently
until they figure out that it is too restrictive (as well as viral).
A great way to move things forward here, Timon, is to write a pull
request against the DIP with motivating text and examples.
I agree, but unfortunately I have many other things on my plate right
now. Add to this that there are six or seven other DIPs that I really
ought to finish/write/implement/rebase. I'll try to get back to this
soon. Here, I was trying to make sure that popular misconceptions do not
gain more traction.
