[dmd-internals] Changes for pure, nothrow, and @safe done for the moment?

[Walter Bright]

On 6/26/2011 9:20 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 6/26/11 11:00 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/26/2011 8:50 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> On 6/26/11 10:34 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> I'm going to just back out the warning about pure functions with no
>>>> effect.
>>>
>>> Why? I think that would be a mistake. Roll in any way you wish (after
>>> fixing bugs and all), but do roll it it. There's absolutely never a
>>> good reason to call a pure function and ignore its result, unless you
>>> just want to keep the CPU warm.
>>>
>>
>> Because with pure & nothrow inference, it breaks a lot of code, for
>> example code like this:
>>
>> void foo(int i)
>> {
>> assert(i == 3);
>> }
>
> Hmmm... in this case, the function may terminate the program. Probably in such 
> a case there should be no warning anyway - it does have an effect.
>

Yeah, well, we have no attribute for that.