On 02/10/2011 10:26 AM, so wrote:
Saying that no one should have to worry about const if they don't want to is a
noble though, I suppose, but I don't think that it's entirely realistic. const
is part of the language, and some things just plain have to be const to work.
And given the prevalence of immutable with regards to threads and the like,
you're going to be forced to use const in many cases anyway.
I don't think that it's all that big a deal with these 4 functions are const.
The impact on the programmer is minimal. They can _almost_ ignore const
completely, since they can still ignore it pretty much everywhere else other
than with the overriden const Object functions.
- Jonathan M Davis
Problem is not having to provide const for these functions, it is the lock-in
we introduce by marking them const.
These functions would be const most of the times, if not all. Still, it is hard
to rule the other case out completely i suppose.
Has it been considered for constness or such constraints not to be inherited?
(Rather plain functype signature.)
Denis
--
_________________
vita es estrany
spir.wikidot.com
