dip1000 + pure is a DEADLY COMBO

Dennis dkorpel at gmail.com
Wed May 12 15:47:24 UTC 2021


On Wednesday, 12 May 2021 at 14:58:23 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> Should it be a bug with Pure rather than dip1000?

Purity is inferred correctly. The problem is that function 
parameters get the `scope` storage class for free when the 
function is strongly pure. In any case, I don't think it makes a 
difference whether you call it a "bug with pure" or a "bug with 
dip1000".



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list