public inbox for gcc@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org, sabre@nondot.org
Cc: dewar@gnat.com, mdetting@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: pure and const functions
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 08:30:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020429153041.09AD7F28BE@nile.gnat.com> (raw)

> 
> This seems nice and simple, but #2 confuses things.  As I understand it,
> GCC automatically trys to prove functions pure.  Obviously it will not be
> able to figure out the structure of a memoizing function in general, so it
> would punt on these functions, thus not automatically marking it pure.
> 
> The programmer, however, can manually add the pure attribute, so the
> actual _notion_ of being pure is still intact, even if the actual
> implementation isn't "smart enough" (and there isn't really any reasonable
> way to make it so).

Given that a programmer can mark things as pure, you need to decide

1. If the compiler can check that this designation is correct. The answer
is pretty clearly no.

2. What exactly is the criterion for "correct" designation of Pure (in
Ada by the way this is the Pure_Function pragma).

Yes, the compiler can try to prove some functions pure, but it will always
end up being too conservative, which is fine.

             reply	other threads:[~2002-04-29 15:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-04-29  8:30 Robert Dewar [this message]
2002-04-29  8:57 ` Chris Lattner
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-29 17:25 John Wehle
2002-04-29  9:29 Robert Dewar
2002-04-29  9:34 ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-29  8:30 Chris Lattner
2002-04-29  9:23 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-04-29  9:52   ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-29  9:58   ` Mark Dettinger
2002-04-29  5:18 Robert Dewar
2002-04-29  5:44 ` Mark Dettinger
2002-04-29  3:59 Mark Dettinger
2002-04-26 10:17 Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 10:21 ` Kris Warkentin
2002-04-26 10:30   ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 10:34     ` Magnus Fromreide
2002-04-26 10:35       ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 10:59         ` Magnus Fromreide
2002-04-26 11:03           ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 11:27             ` Magnus Fromreide
2002-04-26 12:49           ` Russ Allbery
2002-04-26 10:36     ` Kris Warkentin
2002-04-26 10:46       ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 10:26 ` Tim Hollebeek
2002-04-26 10:30   ` Chris Lattner
2002-04-26 10:56     ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-26 11:01       ` Chris Lattner
2002-08-30 23:02         ` Zack Weinberg
2002-04-26 10:56     ` Tony Finch
2002-04-26 12:11 ` Mark Mitchell
2002-04-26  5:16 Mark Dettinger
2002-04-26 11:20 ` Joseph S. Myers
2002-04-26 12:59 ` Jakub Jelinek

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20020429153041.09AD7F28BE@nile.gnat.com \
    --to=dewar@gnat.com \
    --cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=mdetting@yahoo.com \
    --cc=sabre@nondot.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).