Limiting pure functions to the definitions of constants severely limits
their usefulness, and programmers may just ignore them completely and
calculate their results by hand where needed (e.g. replacing ln(2) with
0.69 etc.). They're designed to replace entire function calls with
pre-calculated r
On Sat, Aug 11, 2018 at 8:50 PM J. Gareth Moreton
wrote:
> How and when is the constant defined? Should such constructs be disallowed
> and constants only allowed to be declared in other units that use the unit
> that contains the pure functions in its interface section? What would be
> the ideal
I'm still figuring bits and pieces out, but I've managed to change the
checks so the error that I listed in the last e-mail only appears for
forward-declared functions, not interface + implementation, since I believe
everything gets fully defined by the time the first pass comes along. I'm
still
Hi everyone. The development of pure function support is going well,
along with catching error cases. Thanks to some discussion from Sven, the
compiler will now detect if you reference a function before defining it as
"pure", so cases where it's defined as "forward" are trapped as errors so
as t
