Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If so why not fix const? Why add a whole new keyword? Why complicate the language?


Don't know, you're in WG14, not me :D

Maybe 'const' can't be fixed without breaking existing source code?

I don't really have a problem with adding a new keyword for 'actually const', maybe calling it 'constexpr' means C++ people have wrong expectations though, dunno.

For me, having constexpr being explicit about only accepting actual constant expressions, and creating an error otherwise (instead of silently falling back to a 'runtime expression') is fine, but the existing keyword 'const' has an entirely different meaning, there's just an unfortunate naming collision with other languages where const means 'compile time constant'.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: