DMD 2.000 alpha release

[Reiner Pope]

This looks great!

But as it is, I can't find a difference between invariant(char)[] and 
invariant(char[]). For both of them:

     invariant(char[]) a; // or for invariant(char)[] a
     a = "foo";  // works
//    a[0] = 'a'; // fails
     a = a[1..$]; // works

And, unless I'm missing something, it seems like there's a problem with 
aliases:

     void main()
     {
        alias invariant(Foo) T;
        T s = T(new int);
        *s.a = 5;
     }

     struct Foo
     {
         int* a;
     }

the above code compiles, although it wouldn't if I skipped the alias.

And thirdly, I'm not sure about invariant and const as storage classes. 
They seem to be identical, saying "a compile-time constant", but also 
applying transitively to their types. But if I have a compile-time 
constant, how can it refer to data that can change?

It also feels odd to me, since we seem to have two storage classes to 
effectively say the same thing: "known at compile-time, doesn't occupy 
space." Am I right? Would this mean (except for not wanting to add yet 
*more* keywords) that this is an orthogonal notion which could perhaps 
warrant *yet* *another* term?


It's been lots of fun to play with, though. Thanks!


   -- Reiner