in reply to Re^14: ref to read-only alias ... why? (notabug)
in thread ref to read-only alias ... why?

But my objection is that for(1..3) construct doesn't do aliasing

That's not true. Exactly the same aliasing occurs for both for(1..3) and for(1).

"intentionally returns a modifiable value (in a sense) some of the times" mean

Intentionally coded to return a value that can be changed without causing a read-only error.