Why can't we define re-assignable const reference variable?

[Janice Caron]

On 20/02/2008, Yigal Chripun <yigal100 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  bound const Class c4 = new Class(); // bound (ie const) ref to const data

Wouldn't the word "const" be superfluous in that example, since
constancy is transitive? (If the reference is constant, the data
/must/ be).

It's an interesting idea, but I think, in general, if the compiler
sees an array like

    const(T)[] x;

then it has to mean that the array's contents are not modifiable. That
rule shouldn't depend on T, it should simply be true always. Ditto all
other collections.