On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:29:23 -0600 Derek Elkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Doing it in the IDE would a) require much more from most IDEs and b) > be almost entirely useless. Most IDEs don't even get as far as > parsing the code, even the the best rarely know much about the actual > semantics of the language. This would require a rather deep analysis > and ultimately it is undecidable. Practically speaking, having such > a feature in the IDE would be useless unless the programming style of > most "imperative" programmers changed dramatically. The only > functions such an analysis would say were pure are those that were > rather trivial. Either way, having such a feature in the IDE doesn't > really help. A purity checker in the IDE isn't going to help when > the function/method is unknown, e.g. when I write a function/method > that takes a function or an object. A "purity annotation" would have > to be at the language level, short of doing a whole-program analysis > which would be infeasible. Indeed - JML (Java Modelling Language) takes exactly this approach. -- Robin _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
