opDispatch and compile time parameters

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 10/21/2015 02:54 PM, Don wrote:
>
> Fundamentally the problem is that literals of mutable reference types do
> not make sense.

I think considering "[x,y,z]" a 'literal' is a problem, but why is it 
the problem here? It is not really treated like a literal in this 
context. This has the same issue:

class D{ int x=0; }
class C{ auto x=new D; }

void main(){
     auto c1=new C;
     auto c2=new immutable(C);
     assert(c2.x.x==0);
     c1.x.x=1;
     assert(c2.x.x==1);
}


> This is why I argued (before TDPL came out), that an
> explicit .dup should be required, rather than allowing the compiler to
> secretly add one automatically. Implicit conversion of an array literal
> to mutable is ridiculous IMHO.

Where does the "implicit conversion to mutable" happen here?:

class C{ int x; }

void main(){
     auto c=new C;
     auto a=[c];
}