2013/4/9 Timon Gehr <[email protected]> > On 04/09/2013 12:13 PM, Artur Skawina wrote: > [snip]
> >> That's not pure by any definition, >> > > I'd counter that it is pure by the D definition. > I completely agree with Timon. It's the definition in D. The meaning of 'pure' keyword in D *contains* widely used "pure" meaning, rather than differ. The usefulness of the three purity (weak-const-strong) is still there, and the keyword choice for the concept is enough reasonable. Kenji Hara
