← Back to context

Comment by wtetzner

3 days ago

Sure, but my point is that the semantics between C++ and Rust are different, and are therefore not an exact match as the article stated.

In C++, you define the semantics yourself.

  • No, const semantics are defined by the language definition.

    • It's defined by whatever you put in your const overloads.

      const is primarily a type annotation that affects overload resolution.

      You must be confused because Rust has no overloading to begin with.