From: Dan W. (danw_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-04 19:37:27
Daniel Wallin wrote:
>> I'm a lover of deep copy, deep constness and all deep things myself,
>> and I used to argue for deep_const AND a
>> _deep_copy_assignment_operator at an Eiffel forum; but I would want
>> deep things to be explicit, rather than the semantics of the language
>> we're so used to, to change.
>
> Of course, that's what I suggested from the start.
I know, I'm on your side.. ;-)