Hi,
This:
$ cat test.d
class A
{
int i;
invariant()
{
i = 42;
}
}
Currently doesn't compile:
$ dmd test.d
test.d(7): Error: can only initialize const member i inside constructor
(Obviously this example is silly, but it's just meant to illustrate the
point of this thread.)
I believe this behavior is too strict. I don't agree that the language
should dictate what *my* invariant can and cannot do. Not to mention
that the standard library is far from const-friendly enough for this
strictness to be practically reasonable today (I have tons of cast()s in
my programs today due to this - not cool).
Does anyone else find this behavior too strict?
--
Alex Rønne Petersen
[email protected]
http://lycus.org
