Walter Bright Wrote: > Sean Kelly wrote: > > Hm... can a const object mutate globals? > > Yes.
That's what I thought. Having a transitively const object modify a global doesn't seem much different to me than having it modify a non-owned aliased object. Excepting of course that the compiler can't know which references denote ownership and non-ownership, so the current behavior seems correct from a pragmatic perspective if nothing else.
