Improvement in pure functions specification

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 12/23/2016 12:32 PM, Johan Engelen wrote:
> 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

Is the situash good now? -- Andrei