--- Comment #4 from Max Samukha <samu...@voliacable.com> 2009-10-13 08:44:23
> I think the existing behaviour -- that you cannot change any of the parameters
> in a pure function -- is simple and intuitive: pure functions can only modify
> variables which they created themselves.
But the passed-by-value parts of the arguments are copied and consequently can
be qualified as "variables which they created themselves".
> A rule that pure nested functions can
> use indirectly-referenced data, but cannot use parameters which are passed by
> value, just seems complicated.
I don't think it is too complicated. It can be trivially done like this:
pure int foo(in int d, ...)
// now we should be able to use d in pure nested functions because it is
// guaranteed to not change during the function call.
> Especially, in the case where a parameter contains a reference to other data,
> it seems folly to be allowed to change part of the parameter, but not all of
I am not sure. For example, it seems to be fairly intuitive to be able to
rebind a string parameter, though changing the referenced part of it is not
allowed. I would agree if D's function parameters behaved like aliases to the
arguments, but they are more like the function's local variables, which
arguments are assigned to.
Now that I am trying to purify some functions (most of which have no nested
functions) I need to add the useless temporaries to make them compile :(
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------