|
From: | Mike Solomon |
Subject: | Re: anyone notice speed of 2.17.95 on Windows ? |
Date: | Sun, 15 Dec 2013 11:27:09 +0200 |
On Dec 15, 2013, at 11:22 AM, Trevor Daniels <address@hidden> wrote:
All of these are good - the use of “pure” (not sure who started it - maybe Joe?) comes from: 1. The function always evaluates the same result value given the same argument value(s). The function result value cannot depend on any hidden information or state that may change as program execution proceeds or between different executions of the program, nor can it depend on any external input from I/O devices. 2. Evaluation of the result does not cause any semantically observable side effect or output, such as mutation of mutable objects or output to I/O devices. Currently, LilyPond’s pure functions do (2) but not (1). I don’t even think it’s desirable that they do (1), as the approximation can get better over time. (2), however, is very important. (2) would mean we’re inking things elsewhere. Cheers, MS |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |