On Thursday, 15 May 2014 at 06:59:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
And it _definitely_ has nothing to do with functional purity.
Which makes it pointless and misleading.
Now, combined with other information, you _can_ get functional
purity out it -
e.g. if all the parameters to a function are immutable, then it
_is_
functionally pure, and optimizations requiring functional
purity can be done
with that function.
No, you can't say it is functionally pure if you can flip a coin
with a pure function. To do that you would need a distinction
between "prove pure" and "assume pure" as well as having
immutable reference types that ban identity comparison.
So, no, purity does _not_ imply memoization.
It should, or use a different name.
