Re: Pure Contract bug? (unnecessarily strict)

2012-01-30 Thread Jesse Phillips
On Sunday, 29 January 2012 at 06:22:26 UTC, Era Scarecrow wrote: Maybe someone's brought this up, but i seem to have the compiler complaining to me that my function isn't 'pure' by calling a non-pure function, specifically to!string(). I don't see why this couldn't be done, not only does it

Re: Pure Contract bug? (unnecessarily strict)

2012-01-30 Thread Era Scarecrow
I don't see why this couldn't be done, not only does it get not exist in release, it shouldn't be changing variables in non-release. As mentioned there is a hole for debug code. Report it: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/ and we'll see what happens with that. Reported; Minor priority (Won't

Re: Pure Contract bug? (unnecessarily strict)

2012-01-28 Thread Daniel Murphy
The way to avoid purity checking is to put code in a debug {} statement. I'm not aware of any plans to disable purity checking for contracts.