chriseth
chriseth
Thanks for your suggestions, they all sound good! I'm not sure if we are currently doing CSE for calls to user-defined functions. We did some work on extending the side-effects...
I wrote some example code without `_` and it looked really weird, so I would say we should require the `_` both for defining the function and for using it.
I really like using `using` to tie functions to literal suffixes. In my opinion, the following problems still need to be ironed out: 1. the literal suffixes have to be...
We always have to think about this as being used across files. One file defined the suffix, another file uses it. The using file should explicitly import it. If we...
We still have to figure out how we want constants to behave exactly. Currently, I think you might be able to access private information via constants, which is perhaps not...
Now that we have the pure check, it should be fine to do this at least for actually pure constants.
Ah sorry, I thought I tried the example, but I must have made a mistake.
Design call: moving it into the icebox because there seems to be not too much interest. We may allow constants at file level in the future instead.
I fear this rather has to be not too dissimilar to C++, as we have to generate a fixed signature for every function.