Joshua Tolley writes:
> I've recently run into a problem with a datatype whose operators are
> based on functions not marked IMMUTABLE. Although there might be good
> reasons to have such a thing, it seems like it might be a valuable
> warning message if you create an operator based on an non-IMMU
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 11:27 -0700, Joshua Tolley wrote:
> I've recently run into a problem with a datatype whose operators are
> based on functions not marked IMMUTABLE. Although there might be good
> reasons to have such a thing, it seems like it might be a valuable
> warning message if you create
I've recently run into a problem with a datatype whose operators are
based on functions not marked IMMUTABLE. Although there might be good
reasons to have such a thing, it seems like it might be a valuable
warning message if you create an operator based on an non-IMMUTABLE
function. Comments?
- Jo
