Inability to dup/~ for const arrays of class objects

[Maxim Fomin]

On Thursday, 30 May 2013 at 17:09:05 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 12:56:46 -0400, Steven Schveighoffer 
> <schveiguy at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 30 May 2013 12:46:39 -0400, Maxim Fomin 
>> <maxim at maxim-fomin.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> Please provide reasons why it is wrong (but without 
>>> explanation how druntime allocates memory which is 
>>> irrelevant).
>>
>> It's wrong in that D's spec re-defines dynamic arrays from the 
>> traditional definition (I think for the sake of simplicity, 
>> but I didn't write the definition, so I'm not sure).  D's 
>> slices aren't dynamic arrays, no matter how many specs say so.
>
> Oh, you were looking for an actual *functional* differences 
> between slices and dynamic arrays.
>
>
> -Steve

I was looking for explanation why after years of stable array 
definition one article abolish official spec (without changing 
it) and major implementation without any Walter or Andrei 
approval. I got an answer in previous comment but found it 
unsatisfactory: simply because somebody considers that D 
definitions contradict to some external notions is not a reason 
to change it. There are other places in D which do not correspond 
with names in other languages or with general terms. Also, there 
is as much opinions, as much people, so moving language toward 
some external definition is a problematic task.

It would be good if Walter or Andrei comment on this.