On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 04:52:50 +0200, Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup@billbaxter.com> wrote:
> Kristian Kilpi wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:15:14 +0200, James Dennett <jdennett@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks (for not picking on me). Actually I have used C++ a lot and done preeetty big projects with it. It's amazing that I hadn't noticed the 'mutable' keyword during all these years. When I came across a situation I described earlier in my example, the first thing I thought of was to do a nonconst cast and be done with it. That is, C++ allows you to do that. If nonconst casting had not been possible, then I would have searched for different solution, and noticed that 'mutable' exists.
>
> If you learned C++ pretty early on then it's not too surprising that you weren't aware of 'mutable'.  It was a fairly late addition.  I think the first copy of Stroustrup I bought did not have 'mutable'.
>
> --bb

Well, that solves it; I'm a C++ old schooler.

Hmm, I think I should update my C++ knowledge... there might be something else I'm not aware of. Yes, there must be lots of new cool features that'll make coding an absolute breeze... Yeah, and then I want to win lottary. ;)