Why is immutable not possible as a result of a reduce expression?

[Ali Çehreli]

On 01/05/2013 12:09 PM, Simen Kjaeraas wrote:

 > A little details is that immutable auto is unnecessary, as immutable
 > implies auto (the details are more complex, but that's the short 
version).

It is true that the OP does not need auto when there is already 
immutable but does immutable really imply auto, or are they orthogonal?

Ali

P.S. I had wrongly assumed that D's auto was the same as C++11's auto 
and that it came from "automatic type deduction." That is not true in D. 
As in C and old C++, D's auto comes from "automatic storage duration." 
We still use it for automatic type deduction to make the syntax happy 
when there is no other keyword to put to the left of the symbol.