Background information to this posting was in a very recent summary.

Rahul Dhesi <dhesi%cirrusl@oliveb.atc.olivetti.com> suggested that
!const might be more natural than ~const.  Here are two reasons I
originally chose "~const" instead of "!const":

1.  !const seems to connote that the specified member is merely "not
    const".  The semantics of my proposal call for a more active
    *overriding* of constness that would otherwise be taken on by
    virtue of membership in an enclosing structure.  I feel that this
    meaning is more closely suggested by ~const ("destroy
    constness"?).

2.  People are used to seeing ~ in declarations (as in destructors),
    whereas the idea of seeing ! is more foreign.

This is one of those important but difficult-to-debate aesthetic
issues.  !const does seem like a good alternative.  I could go either
way, but I lean toward ~const.

Comments?
--
  Tom Ngo
  ngo@harvard.harvard.edu
  617/495-1768 lab number, leave message