Inability to dup/~ for const arrays of class objects

[Daniel Murphy]

"Michel Fortin" <michel.fortin at michelf.ca> wrote in message 
news:kp9s6b$29lq$1 at digitalmars.com...
>
> If you can manage to patch DMD as you suggest, then it'll be theoretically 
> more sound and there's chances the resulting code in the compiler (at the 
> semantic level at least) will be cleaner than what I did, so I'm all for 
> it.
>
> I fail to see how getting a "non-reference" type for the class (through U 
> in this template) would be useful though. You can't use that type 
> directly, all you can do is add a 'ref' after it.
>
> My fear is that you'll just move some weird behaviour from the semantic to 
> the syntactic level. You'll have a true reference type that'll be 
> implicitly there but optional at the same time. Well, maybe. That's just a 
> feeling I have. By all means, give it a try so we know how it fares.
>

Yeah, I can't really say much for sure until I've implemented it.  Let's 
hope it all works as well in practise as it does in theory.