Improvement in pure functions specification
Johan Engelen via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Fri Dec 23 09:32:41 PST 2016
On Thursday, 22 December 2016 at 20:53:37 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 21:34:04 UTC, Andrei
> Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Instead of
>>> "Any `pure` function that is not strongly pure cannot be
>>> memoized."
>>> why not
>>> "Any `pure` function that is not strongly pure _may not be
>>> assumed to
>>> be_ memoizable."
>>
>> Got it. Good point. Will do.
>>
>
> That worse than the current wording.
Yes, and I fixed it a few minutes after:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/tnvpmtxcmqiwlmedyiei@forum.dlang.org
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list