Frank Tobin wrote:
> While the
> term "pure", surely can be deemed "correct" in the context of functional
> programming, it cannot in standard Perl programming.
> considering context in which most Perl is written, "pure" has no
> meaning, and hence I wouldn't consider it "correct".
No, "pure function" has a general meaning, independent of any
specific language.
Besides, you're making too much of a distinction between perl and
other languages. Lisp isn't a pure FP language by any means.
--
John Porter
Like music? Then you're gonna love this.
I was into these dudes before anybody.
Asked me to be the manager.
