> That's the thing, & really has nothing to do with constness or immutability No, that means 'reference', but the `mut` and lack of work mean exclusive mutabil

> That's the thing, & really has nothing to do with constness or immutability No, that means 'reference', but the `mut` and lack of work mean exclusive mutability and const respectively. So another term that means share mutability makes sense. > And the language has quite simply moved in the opposite direction to that of having more shorthand syntax Most definitely not. Recent examples are `?` and `async` that replace types with syntax. And coming up the pipe is going to be most coroutines are probably going to get their own syntax too. While year ago that might have been the case (and I think Box should have retained its sigil), the more recent trend is back in the other direction. Also, not that we already have `mut` and `` (no marker), mixing forms would be bad at this time, we instead of `shm` or something we get cells that correspond to the `mut` for shared mutability. And regardless of the syntax question, it is still a massive end around the borrow checker and people refuse to admit how hacky it is.