Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Andrew Godfrey via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 16 July 2016 at 04:24:39 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 7/15/2016 8:25 PM, Andrew Godfrey wrote:
>> I agree and I like mechanically checkable things. But I also 
>> like compiler
>> features that mix mechanical checking with the ability to 
>> attest to something
>> that can't be mechanically checked. Like the @system 
>> attribute. So this line of
>> reasoning feels incomplete to me. Are we talking here about 
>> immutable/const only
>> within the context of @safe code? If so, then I missed that 
>> but I get it.
>
> Since casting away immutable/const is allowed in @system code, 
> yes, I am referring to @safe code here.

Ok. Well, when you and Shachar were arguing, it still doesn't 
seem like Shachar was talking about @safe code specifically. I 
can't wrap my mind around wanting a "logical const" feature 
usable in @safe context; you could already use @system for those 
cases.