C++ const expression are not that const after all

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 4/28/15 4:13 PM, Dicebot wrote:
> On Tuesday, 28 April 2015 at 02:24:02 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> Interesting read, and the conclusion beg the question: why using a
>> sublanguage for const expression, if it do not provides the guarantee
>> it is supposed to.
>>
>> http://b.atch.se/posts/non-constant-constant-expressions/
>
> If someone discovers similar hole in D - please, I beg you, don't try
> building a library on top of it. Report a bug instead :)

FWIW this is addressed as a defect by the C++ std committee. -- Andrei