C++ const expression are not that const after all

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 28 April 2015 at 02:24:02 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> Interesting read, and the conclusion beg the question: why 
> using a sublanguage for const expression, if it do not provides 
> the guarantee it is supposed to.
>
> http://b.atch.se/posts/non-constant-constant-expressions/

If someone discovers similar hole in D - please, I beg you, don't 
try building a library on top of it. Report a bug instead :)