bitfields VS pure nothrow

[David Nadlinger]

On Sunday, 13 May 2012 at 20:49:13 UTC, Guillaume Chatelet wrote:
> IMHO getters and setters could be nothrow but what about 
> purity? Looks
> like it's a bit far-fetched to qualify member methods as pure 
> right?
> Yet it makes sense regarding the semantic. What's your take on 
> that?

Yes, the getters and setters should be both pure and nothrow.

Your question about purity actually roots in a quite common
misunderstanding – I have a pretty comprehensive article on the
topic in the pipe, hope to be able to finish it later this week.

David