[m-rev.] for review: pure mutable access predicates

[Ralph Becket]

Julien Fischer, Wednesday,  5 October 2005:
> 
> The mutable still won't necessarily be attached to the IO
> state - we still generate the nonpure access preds.  Plus
> I don't really like that name.

I just think `pure' is the wrong name.  What the extra attribute does is
construct an extra pair of pure access predicates that adjust the IO
state.  It seems to me that the io state should therefore be mentioned
in the new attribute name.  Apart from that I'm not really bothered
about what name we pick for it.

-- Ralph
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------