Inability to dup/~ for const arrays of class objects

[Maxim Fomin]

On Thursday, 30 May 2013 at 17:33:32 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
> On 05/30/2013 09:23 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
>
> > Note, that there is no problem with alising of slice and
> dynamic
> > array, but there is problem with denying that dynamic array
> (according
> > to spec) is a slice.
>
> That gets back to your "banana" example. Slice and dynamic 
> array is the same thing only because the spec says so. They do 
> not have the same semantics of dynamic arrays as I know in 
> programming.
> They are not dynamic in the sense that they are on the heap. 
> (Both your and my examples have trivially shown that.)
> Further, they are not arrays in the sense that they own 
> elements.
> Therefore, calling this concept "dynamic array" is a historical 
> accident. The spec may call it "dynamic array" but the spec 
> cannot change what "dynamic array" means.
>
> Ali

Really it is repetition of banana example. One article severely 
changes spec because there is opinion that existing spec 
contradicts some ideas. And now it is claimed that some things 
are false just because they are false. It is a hijack of language 
which allows to anyone whose opinion is somewhat different to D 
to claim that his opinion is what D actually is. Without Walter 
or Andrei approval such claims are cheap.