PROPOSAL: Implicit conversions of integer literals to floating point

[Don]

so wrote:
>> This problem has already hit Phobos. We inserted a hack so that 
>> sqrt(2) will work. But exp(1) doesn't work.
>> Note that the problems really arise because we've inherited C's rather 
>> cavalier approach to implicit conversion.
> 
> Classifying 2 as an int was a very wrong start.
Exactly. It's not a int, it's the number two!

> This proposal reminds me my proposal on polysemous literals that i had a 
> hard time explaining. (Still, i am not sure if anyone got the point)

Yes, this is far from the first time that this issue has been noticed.