From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e369abf7da96fac
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Received: by 10.68.211.195 with SMTP id ne3mr629096pbc.2.1326454081010;
        Fri, 13 Jan 2012 03:28:01 -0800 (PST)
Path: 
 lh20ni177213pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!h13g2000vbn.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: Martin <martin@thedowies.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Pure function aspect?...
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 03:01:35 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Message-ID: 
 <26153f03-40a0-4101-a9aa-b15f90cb0b69@h13g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
References: 
 <1d74a186-2599-4de5-af49-ffca2529ea96@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>
 <jens6a$3fb$1@munin.nbi.dk> <18gmy0hbklhv5.swfwyybigqv2$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 20.133.0.8
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1326454080 26397 127.0.0.1 (13 Jan 2012 11:28:00
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:28:00 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: h13g2000vbn.googlegroups.com; posting-host=20.133.0.8;
 posting-account=g4n69woAAACHKbpceNrvOhHWViIbdQ9G
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALERCFNK
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1;
 rv:10.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/10.0,gzip(gfe)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: 2012-01-13T03:01:35-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Jan 13, 8:45=A0am, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:00:05 -0600, Randy Brukardt wrote:
> > "Martin" <mar...@thedowies.com> wrote in message
> >news:1d74a186-2599-4de5-af49-ffca2529ea96@do4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com..=
.
> >> Now Ada has bitten the bullet and allowed "in out" mode parameters in
> >> functions, is it time to allow users to contract the other extreme and
> >> allow a function to be declared Pure (no state changes, not even
> >> hidden ones)? e.g.
>
> >> package P is
> >> =A0 type T is tagged private;
> >> =A0 function Pure_F =A0 (Self : T) return Integer
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0with Pure;
> >> =A0 function Impure_F (Self : T) return Integer;
> >> private
> >> =A0 type T is tagged record
> >> =A0 =A0 =A0I : Integer :=3D 0;
> >> =A0 end record;
> >> end P;
>
> >> Functions with a Pure contract would be allowed to call other
> >> functions with pure contracts, read values/parameters but promise to
> >> change nothing (not even via 'tricks' a la random number generator!!).
>
> > We've argued this for a long time within the ARG, and we haven't been a=
ble
> > to get a real consensus. This discussion goes back to Ada 79 (which is =
even
> > before I got involved in Ada) -- early drafts of Ada had both functions
> > (which were what we now call pure) and value-returning procedures (whic=
h
> > were not). The concern was that there was not a clear line between them=
, and
> > moreover there are many sorts of functions that are "logically" pure bu=
t
> > still do change things (the "memo function" being the banner carrier fo=
r
> > that idea).
>
> I think that the problem may be resolved by considering the contexts wher=
e
> the function is pure. There is no absolutely pure functions, any one is
> impure because it returns something, pumps stack etc. The result is taken
> out of consideration, so are local variables etc. There should be some
> syntax for specifying what is not touched at the given level of "purity"
> and what is.
[snip]


Care to mock up an example of the levels you had in mind?

Is it something like (and stealing Randy's "Global"):


function F1 (P1 : T1; P2 : T2) return Boolean
  with Pure =3D> (Global, P1);  -- promise to not change globals or
parameter P1, might tamper with P2

function F1 (P1 : T1; P2 : T2) return Boolean
  with Pure =3D> (all);  -- promise to not change anything (other than
subprogram local objects)

function F1 (P1 : in out T1) return Boolean
  with Pure =3D> (Global);  -- promise to not change anything other than
subprogram local objects or parameters


A function with no pure aspect might be equivilent of:

function F1 (P1 : T1; P2 : T2) return Boolean
  with Pure =3D> (null);  -- no promise to not change anything local,
global or parameter


-- Martin