pure or not pure?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Janice Caron" wrote
> On 10/04/2008, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> OK, sure, so that means you believe:
>
> Please don't make claims concerning what I may or may not believe.
> Only I get to make those claims.
>
> For the record, I do /not/ believe that which you claim I believe.
>
> Feel free to rephrase as "assertion X leads to conclusion Y" or some
> such, but please don't get personal, or I'm outa here.

If you read the post, you would see that it was a question, and assuming 
that it was true, a further question about why you think that.

"so that means you believe: .... right?"

First, off, this is not an attack.  Second, even if it was an attack, it's 
not about anything personal.  It's about your beliefs on a language design. 
Please don't get so defensive, nobody is attacking you personally.  We're 
all trying to figure this pure function thing out, and I happen to think 
your statements are inconsistent.  This has nothing to do with what I think 
of you personally.

-Steve