Re: Improvement in pure functions specification

[Johan Engelen via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 22 December 2016 at 20:53:37 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 21 December 2016 at 21:34:04 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
Instead of
  "Any `pure` function that is not strongly pure cannot be 
memoized."
why not
  "Any `pure` function that is not strongly pure _may not be 
assumed to
be_ memoizable."

Got it. Good point. Will do.


That worse than the current wording.

Yes, and I fixed it a few minutes after: 
https://forum.dlang.org/post/tnvpmtxcmqiwlmedy...@forum.dlang.org