On Jun 17, 11 22:41, Timon Gehr wrote:
[snip]
A small problem I can see with the purity validation algorithm proposed by
Andrei
relates to incremental builds (again):
module A;
int iampure(){
return 5;
}
module B;
int puretemplate()(){ // inferred pure
return iampure();
}
int main(){
import std.stdio;
writeln(puretemplate(), puretemplate()); // compiler caches result
}
$ dmd -c A
$ dmd -c B
$ dmd A.o B.o; ./A
55
Some funny guy decides to change A.iampure:
module A;
int iampure(){
static int x;
return ++x;
}
$ dmd -c A
$ dmd A.o B.o; ./A
11
Wrong! Should be 12.
That happens too if 'iampure' is a template or the compiler inline a
function which should be modified, with or without caching. I don't see
this as a problem of attribute inference.
[snip]
Timon
