On Wed, 2011-04-20 at 10:44 -0400, Noah Misch wrote:
> If we add that ownership check, we'll protect some operations on the
> type. The
> cost is localized divergence from our principle that types have no
> usage
> restrictions. I'm of the opinion that it's not worth introducing that
> policy
> exception to block just some of these avenues of attack. I would not
> object to
> it, though.
So that means we should leave it as is for now? Fine with me.