On Mon, 2004-12-13 at 23:01, Thomas Fischbacher wrote:

> > The point really is: what do you mean by purely functional?
> > I think the answer depends on context.
> 
> I think the answer depends on properly wording the question!

Of course :) I hardly need to point out that in all likelihood
if I could do that, I'd probably already know the answer :)

> My point is that with statements like
> 
> > Yes, that indeed is my intention. Basically, any non-transparent
>                                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > non-function code can be made purely functional and transparent
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > with a simple transformation, yet it doesn't by this transformation
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > get any easier to reason about the code.
> 
> you are trying to "hit real people with mental bricks".

LOL! Over the Internet too :)

-- 
John Skaller, mailto:skaller@users.sf.net
voice: 061-2-9660-0850, 
snail: PO BOX 401 Glebe NSW 2037 Australia
Checkout the Felix programming language http://felix.sf.net