http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=8185
--- Comment #30 from Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> 2012-06-04 03:42:40 PDT --- > I think you've provided a good explanation of the high-level design of the > pure keyword, more than once, but it seems that you are missing that this > issue, at least as stated in comment 3, is actually about a very specific > detail: The extent to which memory reachably by manipulating passed in > pointers is still considered �local�, i.e. accessible by pure functions. pure doesn't restrict pointers in any way shape or form. That's an @safe/@trusted/@system issue, and is completely orthogonal to pure. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
