Why are opEquals/opCmp arguments not in or const for Objects?

[Jakob Ovrum]

On Monday, 18 March 2013 at 01:05:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> So, once all of those functions are removed from Object, 
> derived types can
> then define them with whatever attributes they want. The only 
> thing you lose is
> the ability to compare Objects directly, which is not necessary 
> in D and is
> arguably a bad idea anyway.

It's worth noting that including a standard interface (as in the 
interface keyword) for stuff like Comparable, Hashable etc. is a 
possibility that can be explored to enable runtime polymorphism 
akin to the current Object for programs that need it. Either way, 
I'm glad it's on its way out of Object.