Re: incorrect use of 'pure' attribute

On 8/8/26 05:38, Sam James wrote:
> The comment simply isn't right and it makes an assertion that doesn't
> reflect reality. It is not validly const if it uses global memory to
> affect what it returns, even if later calls are OK.

But __eloop_threshold doesn't use global memory to affect what it 
returns. It always returns the same value, every time. So, even though 
__eloop_threshold uses static storage (I assume that's what you mean by 
"global memory"), its use of that static storage doesn't affect what it 
returns.

In this sense I guess __eloop_threshold differs from a common C++ idiom, 
in which even though the function always returns the same value, that 
value is affected by what's already in memory. __eloop_threshold does 
not have that property.

If my understanding is incorrect I'd appreciate a clarification, e.g., 
an example of an optimization that GCC might apply that would be invalid 
for __eloop_threshold.