On Monday 24 January 2011 06:45:27 Andrej Mitrovic wrote: > Perhaps it would be less ambiguous if we turned const/immutable for > functions into annotations: > > @const Foo bar(); //const function > @immutable Foo bar(); //immutable function > @immutable const(Foo) bar(); //immutable function with const return value > @const const(Foo) bar(); //const function with const return value > immutable(Foo) bar(); //mutable function with immutable return value > @immutable immutable(Foo) bor(); //immutable function with immutable > return value > > But I'm not a big fan of "@", it clutters up source code.
Well, any change to the situation would break TDPL, I believe, so we're pretty much stuck. If Walter didn't think it was bad enough to fix by now, he won't fix it post-TDPL. - Jonathan M Davis
