On Wednesday, January 7, 2015, Geoffrey Irving <[email protected]> wrote:

> So, for the sake of purity and good design, you're advocating for
> global mutable state?
>
> Geoffrey
>

The question "are we inadvertently predicating decisions on the assumption
of purity?" is valid.  If he is doing that, Keann seems within bounds given
that BitC is statefull. This doesn't absolve the question, because pure
idioms remain useful in the context of proof discharge. We shouldn't abhore
statefull idioms, but we should do our best to account for them, where
possible, as optimizations on pure idioms.

That said, the discussion is not enhanced by *ad hominem* framing, I have
made this mistake myself, but let's try to avoid personalizing the
discussion.

Shap
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev

Reply via email to