2011/11/16 Walter Bright <[email protected]>: > > On 11/16/2011 12:31 AM, Don Clugston wrote: >> >> That's intentional. If it is only *deduced* to be pure/nothrow/safe, >> then external functions, which don't have access to the source, can >> NOT rely on it being pure/nothrow/safe. I think this is the right >> choice. >> Suppose I want to declare a stub function. At the moment, because it's >> just a stub, it isn't impure or unsafe, but I know that when it is >> fully implemented, it will be impure and unsafe, and may throw. >> The deduction should not be giving additional guarantees to external >> code. It should be conservative. > > I think Don's reasoning is sound.
Thanks for your explanations. OK, It is reasonable. Because of it, there is an issue caused by fixing 6902 with my patch. I'll post a pull to fix it. kenji Hara _______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
