• bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> Mar 24 2011

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Bruno Medeiros:

 I think that the concession that pure will be allowed to allocate memory 
 does inescapably remove some of the guarantees that pure functions offer 
 (like that one that the return value depends only on the arguments).
 One possible fix to this would be to say that the allocated memory must 
 be temporary (used only during the execution of the pure function). Thus 
 you would not be able to return any newly-allocated value. But I don't 
 know if this further restriction is desirable or not. I don't remember 
 if this aspect of memory allocation in pure functions was 
 discussed/thought-out extensively or not. (it probably needs to)


I have discussed this a bit with Steven Schveighoffer, see the  transparent
attribute, in this "Uh... destructors?" thread:
http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=130554

Bye,
bearophile