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,LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5265ce03ee8f5252 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-01-05 20:10:03 PST Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!news-feed.riddles.org.uk!newsengine.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!news.execpc.com!newspeer.sol.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!sjc-peer.news.verio.net!news.verio.net!iad-read.news.verio.net.POSTED!kilgallen From: Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ok sorry, it is just a book gives no feedback. Message-ID: References: <931r2l$4ai5t$2@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <931t08$5u5$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <932632$e0e$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <932an8$ijs$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <93421h$2ju$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <934j5c$eu9$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Organization: LJK Software Date: 5 Jan 2001 23:05:52 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.44.122.34 X-Complaints-To: abuse@verio.net X-Trace: iad-read.news.verio.net 978753955 216.44.122.34 (Sat, 06 Jan 2001 04:05:55 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 04:05:55 GMT Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:3700 Date: 2001-01-05T23:05:52-05:00 List-Id: In article , "Randy Brukardt" writes: > Robert Dewar wrote in message <934j5c$eu9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>... >>In article <93421h$2ju$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, >>That's the point, it is easy to make vague statements about >>"side effects considered harmful", but it is quite another to >>rigorously define what you mean by side effects. >> >>You do NOT want to tell people that instrumenting functions is >>for some peculiar reason undesirable, or that memo functions >>are undesirable (though of course in the multi-tasking case, >>you have to worry about reentrancy in both these cases). > > Indeed, that is why pragma Pure is so hard to use in practice: because > you can't instrument or otherwise debug code controlled by it. About all > you can do is remove the pragma, but that often makes the clients of the > package illegal. Thus debugging these things can be horrible. Is it the case that implementations are forbidden to allow debugger breakpoints in code controlled by pragma Pure ? I would think that would be well beyond what the Standard should control.