Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 12 July 2016 at 13:13:42 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> This is so, so wrong. There's a world of difference between 
> "you have to get this right or you're in trouble" and "the 
> compiler (and especially the optimiser) is free to assume that 
> what you're doing never happens".

I'd say the compiler (and especially the optimiser) should assume 
that mutable and immutable data don't overlap as if casting never 
happens. Not sure if this means gcc-style UB.