Flix – A powerful effect-oriented programming language

Re:Flix – A powerful effect-oriented programming language by remon on Friday July 11, 2025 @04:30AM (#44529656)

Curious if anyone can weigh in on why Flix requires a developer to explicitly mark a function as pure. I'd imagine in almost all cases this can be derived through static analysis.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flix – A powerful effect-oriented programming language by teamonkey on Friday July 11, 2025 @05:04AM (#44529914)

I think if you mark a function as pure the compiler guarantees that this is indeed the case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flix – A powerful effect-oriented programming language by zambal on Friday July 11, 2025 @04:43AM (#44529751)

I could be wrong, but the sentence "Flix precisely tracks the purity of every expression in a program." together with some examples of function definitions without the purity/impurity annotation, gave me the impression it's optional, because the compiler can infer it on its own most of the time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Flix – A powerful effect-oriented programming language by mrkeen on Friday July 11, 2025 @06:41AM (#44530613)

Just like const, private and static.

[ Parent | on HN ]