On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 06:31:13PM +0200, Meta wrote: > On Thursday, 11 July 2013 at 16:14:13 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 05:25:09PM +0200, bearophile wrote: > >Hmm. This seems to be a tricky corner case. The delegate itself is > >impure, as it accesses y which is outside of its definition and > >isn't part of its arguments; however, in the larger context of > >spam(), this shouldn't be a problem since y is accessed via > >'this', and 'this' is part of spam's input. > > Isn't it okay for pure functions to access global immutable state, > such as what the delegate is doing here?
True, I didn't think of that. :) So in this case it looks like a regression. T -- Mediocrity has been pushed to extremes.
