Generality creep

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 3/30/19 8:05 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/30/2019 12:38 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
>> Then again, Walter has made (limited) efforts to support ranges that 
>> are non-assignable due to const fields. Nobody acknowledges that those 
>> exact changes also work to accommodate RefRange, but they do.
> 
> I'm fine with adjusting `save()` implementations to use construction 
> rather than assignment semantics, because that's the way `save()` is 
> defined to behave (although it wasn't clearly spelled out).

Great, so ag0aep6g you're good to go with your PR. I'd approved it 
yesterday.