Const vs static

A proposal to extend statics/constants so that `static` always declares a global variable (memory location) with an address and `const` declares global *values*. `const` is what we expect users to use most of the time, `static` is only intended to be used in narrow circumstances.
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 03:05:03PM -0700, bill-myers wrote:
> Is a "static mut" of type T any different from a non-mut static of type UnsafeCell\<T\> in this proposal? (other than syntax)
> ...
> It seems not, and in this case it seems redundant to provide static muts.

I believe you are correct that there is little added value. They are
there for convenience, for analogy with "let mut", primarily, and
perhaps partly for interfacing with C code (that is, extern static
mut?). The latter point seems important, although the memory layout of
`Unsafe<T>` and `T` are identical, so perhaps it is not. That said, it
makes the proposal simpler to exclude them. This is roughly what PR
#228 proposed (well, not quite, but very similar).