[dmd-beta] beta 2

[Don Clugston]

On 7 July 2011 03:12, Jason House <jason.james.house at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 6, 2011, at 6:02 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
> On 7/6/2011 2:12 PM, David Simcha wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Walter Bright <walter at digitalmars.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> This is what I have difficulty with. Consider:
>>
>>    pure void foo(int* p) { *p = 3; }
>>
>> That isn't pure, or weakly pure.
>
> ???? Yes it is.  It can be called from a strongly pure function without
> violating purity
>
> Yes, but it is not pure itself.
>
> Eek! Walter, I think you have a severe misunderstanding of Don's weak/strong
> purity concept. Doing a quick google search, I found the following
> link: http://www.mail-archive.com/digitalmars-d@puremagic.com/msg40808.html

Walter, I don't know what's happened here. You seem to have forgotten
the whole point, somehow.
The whole point of the 'weak pure' concept was that, provided a
function doesn't directly access global variables, it is OK for it to
be called from a strongly pure function.
If a function is weakly pure, that means pretty much nothing. You
can't do any optimization with it, etc.
The one and only thing is gives you, is that it can safely be called
from a strongly pure function.
You seem to be removing weak purity from the language???