To help LDC/GDC

[kenji hara]

2013/4/9 Dicebot <m.strashun at gmail.com>

> On Tuesday, 9 April 2013 at 12:56:04 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> It is valid code. It is "weak pure". "pure' keyword means both
>>> "strong pure" or "weak pure" depending on function body. Crap.
>>>
>>
>> s/body/signature/
>> s/Crap/Awesome/
>>
>
> Not gonna argue latter but former is just wrong.
>
> struct Test
> {
>     int a;
>     pure int foo1() // strong pure
>     {
>         return 42;
>     }
>
>     pure int foo2() // weak pure
>     {
>         return a++;
>     }
> }
>
> Signature is the same for both functions.
>

Both have weak pure. Purity is always calculated only from the function
signature.
If you make member function "strong pure", _at least_ it should be
qualified with "immutable".

    pure int foo3() immutable // strong pure
    {
        return 10;
    }

Kenji Hara
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20130409/14339b5b/attachment.html>