Shallow constness?

[Dicebot]

On Tuesday, 23 July 2013 at 18:01:58 UTC, Maxime 
Chevalier-Boisvert wrote:
> I saw that one can define a getter function without a setter to 
> achieve this behavior, but that seems like a little bit of a 
> hack.

As far as I am aware, it is not a hack, but recommended practice. 
It actually does make sense - what you want has nothing to do 
with actual mutability of a member (at least within D concept of 
mutability) but is more like a tool for controlling access to it.