Yes, that is what I was trying to say.
Originally Posted by Elysia
I guess the decision to call the readonly keyword `const' was misleading in that, from the compiler's perspective, its value will not necessarily be known at compile-time.
Because it's more of a compiler-technical detail, a lot of programmers (myself included) are caught by surprise when their compiler gets angry about using a const, but not const expression, variable in a situation where a const expression is required.
Indeed. I agree it's misleading.
And I also think that some things should be enhanced to allow for more constant expressions.
Such as float, double, const char* in templates (at least the former), constant expression functions. That would be nice. Among other things.