How to break const

[Mehrdad]

On Monday, 18 June 2012 at 14:37:26 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> On 6/18/12 1:35 AM, Matthias Walter wrote:
>> On 06/18/2012 08:19 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
>>> On Monday, 18 June 2012 at 06:14:22 UTC, Matthias Walter 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Its not, that a const method cannot modify an object, it just
>>>> ensures that the const method cannot modify the object *by 
>>>> using
>>>> the this-pointer*.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I see...
>>>
>>>
>>> So that means you /can't/ tell something just by looking at a 
>>> part
>>> of the code, right?
>>>
>>> (Just mentioning this since this idea seemed to be emphasized 
>>> a lot
>>> by D.)
>>
>> Yes, you are right with that.
>
> Actually things are a fair amount subtler. On the face of it, 
> immutable does fulfill the OP's expectation. But even for const 
> code, there's still a lot of guarantees that can be inferred 
> depending on the types involved.
>
> Andrei

Changing "new const(S)(0);" to "new immutable(S)(0);" still 
doesn't work tho.