A rationale for pure nothrow ---> @pure @nothrow (and nothing else changes)

[Don]

Sönke Ludwig wrote:
> I would also tend to agree that this set of rules is a bit arbitrary
> and seems a bit like some overfitted classifier in pattern recognition
> (although there were worse sets or rules in that regard).

Almost everyone has missed the point. We are OUT OF TIME. This is just 
damage control.

All that's being discussed here is that it's easier to defend:

@pure, @nothrow, @safe

than:

pure, nothow, @safe

And I'm arguing that we have a consensus on that.

The only other worthwhile question is whether we have a concensus on 
@deprecated. We might. Everything else discussed here has been a 
complete waste of time.

And it may already be too late for @pure @nothrow.