[m-rev.] for review: improve purity documentation

[Peter Schachte]

> doc/reference_manual.texi:
> 	Improve the documentation regarding purity.

This looks good to me, except one nit:

>  @item semipure
>  Semipure predicates are just like pure predicates, except that their
> -behaviour may be affected by the invocation of impure predicates.  That
> -is, they are sensitive to the state of the computation other than as
> -reflected by their input arguments, though they do not affect the state
> -themselves.
> +declarative semantics may be affected by the invocation of impure
> +predicates.  That is, they are sensitive to the state of the computation
> +other than as reflected by their input arguments, though they do not
> +affect the state themselves.

Haven't we said in the past that impure and semipure predicates have
no declarative semantics, only operational semantics?

-- 
Peter Schachte              If your thesis is utterly vacuous Use
schachte at cs.mu.OZ.AU        first-order predicate calculus. With sufficient
www.cs.mu.oz.au/~schachte/  formality The sheerist banality Will be hailed
Phone: +61 3 8344 9166      by the critics: "Miraculous!" -- Anon. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-reviews mailing list
post:  mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
administrative address: owner-mercury-reviews at cs.mu.oz.au
unsubscribe: Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: unsubscribe
subscribe:   Address: mercury-reviews-request at cs.mu.oz.au Message: subscribe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------