Implicit conversions through purity

[Daniel Murphy]

"Jonathan M Davis"  wrote in message 
news:mailman.112.1397351369.5999.digitalmars-d-learn at puremagic.com...

> Honestly, I would have considered that to be a bug. Converting the return 
> type
> to a different level of mutability based on purity is one thing. 
> Automatically
> casting the return value just because the function is pure is another 
> matter
> entirely. Clearly, it can work, but it seems incredibly sloppy to me.

It's not a bug, and it's not another matter entirely - it's the same thing 
as converting a call expression, just on the inside instead of the outside.