I don't, it's a rhetorical question.
Meaning "why don't you use Const::Fast instead of ReadonlyX?".
Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the 𐍀𐌴𐍂𐌻 Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery
In reply to Re^7: Readonly vs ReadonlyX (updated PC-Source + Const::Fast)
by LanX
in thread Readonly vs ReadonlyX
by rlauer
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |