Felix scripsit: > I used "pure" only half-heartedly. Strictly speaking a "pure" function should > not even throw an error, the "pure" meaning: this procedure will not have > any effect whatsoever, regardless of arguments (so it can be removed if the > result is unused). "(length 42)" will signal an error, so it is not pure.
Frankly, if it were treated as pure I doubt if any Real World programs would be affected. I've never had much sympathy for the CL and R6RS viewpoint that programmers should be able to count on a run-time exception being raised when they've done something silly. -- Income tax, if I may be pardoned for saying so, John Cowan is a tax on income. --Lord Macnaghten (1901) co...@ccil.org _______________________________________________ Chicken-hackers mailing list Chicken-hackers@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
