On 1/3/11 12:06 AM, Peter Alexander wrote: [quoting an older post of mine]
As an aside, I know what it takes to define lazily computed state to work with const, but Walter is at the bottom of a 5000 TeV potential hole that spells like "this is like C++ mutable and C++ mutable is incorrect, therefore I will not process any information henceforth". So I am unable to even start explaining that to him. Besides, assuming Walter is convinced of the correctness of the feature, it's unclear whether it will pull its weight. It will complicate the language, and the benefits, while there, are rather subtle.
I am glad to announce that now Walter and me see eye to eye in the matter of lazily computable state. We also have a path to get there, but it's a fair amount of work.
Andrei
