On Mon, 19 May 2014 13:31:08 -0400, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Monday, 19 May 2014 at 17:11:43 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
It shouldn't matter. Something that returns immutable references, can
return that same thing again if asked the same way. Nobody should be
looking at the address in any meaningful way.
I think this is at odds with generic programming. What you are saying is
that if you plug a pure function into an algorithm then you have to test
for "pure" in the algorithm if it is affected by object identity.
Otherwise, goodbye plug-n-play.
I think I misstated this, of course, looking at the address for certain
reasons is OK, Object identity being one of them.
But some of the tricks being detailed here as "proof" that we cannot
memoize are not really valid code.
Returning the same immutable object, when called with the same immutable
parameters, should never cause a break in code, pure or not.
-Steve
