On 06/19/2012 07:18 PM, Christophe Travert wrote:
Timon Gehr , dans le message (digitalmars.D:170178), a écrit :
That is completely unrelated.
It is impossible to justify transitivity of const for delegate context
pointers using this argument. It is far too general and the
justification for the general concept comes from a specific example
that is different from the one at hand.
The question is, what the meaning of 'const' references should be:
1. data cannot be changed transitively through the reference
2. the reference can reference both 'const' and 'immutable' data and
'immutable' data can transitively not be changed through the
reference.
1. requires transitive const for delegate context pointers, 2. does not.
A const reference can contain
I don't understand the difference.
...
In 2., mutable data referred to by a const reference might be changed
through it.
