Explanation of 'const' does not convey mutability

[ryanmcdermott]

Explanation of 'const' does not convey mutability

[schoenwaldnils]

Thats why I opened a PR #51
Maybe this issue is a duplicate to #31 ?

[arayi]

How is that addressed in PR #51 ?

See https://github.com/ryanmcdermott/clean-code-javascript#use-es6-constants-when-variable-values-do-not-change

This section seems to convey that const is for immutable values. "If the value changes, I change it to let" in #31 also seems to convey that const is for immutable values. So someone unfamiliar with how it is implemented may accidentally code something that modifies their const without reassigning it (which DOES work, unlike reassigning), and become very confused.

But no, this is not addressed in either of those.

[schoenwaldnils]

Sorry, I misunderstood that the issue is about this paragraph.
True, my PR just fixes the use of let and const in the readme itself.

The paragraph has to be rewritten, of course.

[tonytran1]

That's true, const properties can be changed and are mutable. The section was referring to primitive values of declared constants. Of course that's not their only use. Please update it to your understanding. Thanks.

[ryanmcdermott]

Thanks Arayi! You're right that the paragraph doesn't do the best job explaining the nature of the keyword const I think we should link to @mathiasbynens and @ericelliott for an authoritative educational stance on this. I would love a PR to accompany @schoenwaldnils awesome work!

[ryanmcdermott]

This subsection was removed for the time being, until we come up with a better explanation for when to prefer const and how it helps improve refactorability.

ac47e82