This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: pure and const functions
- From: Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot dot org>
- To: Robert Dewar <dewar at gnat dot com>
- Cc: <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 11:26:37 -0500 (CDT)
- Subject: Re: pure and const functions
> I actually think you *do* agree with me. What I said was that it was in
I now agree that I agree with you. :)
I think that:
> 2. Define what the functional effect of declarting something pure is
... is easiest, and should probably be made especially clear in the
documentation, because it is what impacts the user. The problem is that
it has to be updated as new transformations are added...
> 1. Define what pure means semantically
This needs to be well understood by GCC developers that are making the new
transformations... but it would certainly be nice to have. Unfortunately
it's kind of hard to pin down, your sqrt example is a good example of
why. :)
-Chris
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/os/
http://www.nondot.org/~sabre/Projects/