• Wyverex (3/3) Aug 20 2008 What benefit is there in using pure? Messed around with it on some
• BCS (3/8) Aug 20 2008 After it gets implemented (IIRC)
• Wyverex (3/16) Aug 20 2008 So I've been messing with something thats not implemented?!?!
• JAnderson (4/20) Aug 20 2008 I think the reason its there is so people can start using it in there

Wyverex <wyverex.cypher gmail.com> writes:

What benefit is there in using pure?  Messed around with it on some 
simple functions and there is no difference reported by the profiler..

So why use pure, and when should we use it?

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to wyverex,

 What benefit is there in using pure?  Messed around with it on some
 simple functions and there is no difference reported by the profiler..
 
 So why use pure,

I don't 

 and when should we use it?

After it gets implemented (IIRC)

Wyverex <wyverex.cypher gmail.com> writes:

BCS wrote:
 Reply to wyverex,
 
 What benefit is there in using pure?  Messed around with it on some
 simple functions and there is no difference reported by the profiler..

 So why use pure,

 
 I don't
 and when should we use it?

 
 After it gets implemented (IIRC)
 
 

So I've been messing with something thats not implemented?!?!
Blah..

JAnderson <ask me.com> writes:

Wyverex wrote:
 BCS wrote:
 Reply to wyverex,

 What benefit is there in using pure?  Messed around with it on some
 simple functions and there is no difference reported by the profiler..

 So why use pure,

 I don't
 and when should we use it?

 After it gets implemented (IIRC)

 So I've been messing with something thats not implemented?!?!
 Blah..

I think the reason its there is so people can start using it in there 
code and they won't have backwoods compatibility issues when it is 
actually implemented.