On 01/19/2010 04:56 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Tue, Jan 19, 2010 at 11:52:16AM -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I think he includes D1 code, which would be harder to port to D2. Makes
sense to me, that's why I think introducing the := operator as an alias to
immutable/const would be a good compromise. It makes extremely easy to use
immutable/const variables while keeping backward compatibility.
Would this be a realistic fear with it?
receiver := 1;
reciever := 2; // meant to rebind, but spelling error goes unnoticed by compiler
If so, bah. Of course, I like it how it is now anyway.
Python, and most other dynamic languages, have that problem. They are
not suffering because of it.
Also, const cannot be rebound.
