Re: Doc writing for unpure-pure-containers

[address@hidden]

On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:33 PM, Ian Hulin wrote:

> Hi Mike,
> On 14/11/11 10:18, address@hidden wrote:
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> I've answered a couple questions recently where
>> unpure-pure-containers have come in handy and think it'd be
>> beneficial to have some text in the notation manual about them.
>> However, understanding pure properties is scary for developers, so
>> I'd imagine that it'd be downright nightmarish for users.  James -
>> would you be interested in helping me out with this? I think that
>> you're good at formulating things in a way that people understand.
>> 
>> Cheers, MS
> Why are you using unpure rather than impure in the name? It make my
> internal spelling checker's alarm bells ring.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ian
> 

I think because I wanted to express the notion of not-pure in a sort of binary 
way (in my new jerseyan English, I have a tendency to use "un" for all 
negation, so something's never bad, it's just ungood).  "impure" to me sounds 
like a term from the spanish inquisition or a novel by dostoyevsky.  but i can 
change it...

Cheers,
MS