Tony Morris

@dibblego @mwotton Osaki uses the term pure to describe languages. Anyway I'm looking for a peer reviewed ref for proper usage if one exists

@takeoutweight @mwotton There is no possible situation where your claim about "state" and "monad" and "mutable ref" is sensible.

@dibblego It is sensible. Monads give denotational semantics to mutable refs. What semantics could State have that are "more equational?"

@takeoutweight Kleisli is a profunctor, therefore, "pure" is meaningless. Similarly ridiculous statement.

@dibblego Anyway if we agree "pure" is meaningless here and it's a term used only informally without a formal treatment we have no quarrel

@takeoutweight it is a synonym for a formally described concept. No I don't agree. You are misusing way too many terms to solicit agreement.

@dibblego OK np. Just saying monads were intro'd to CS by Moggi precisely to give denotational semantics (+ eq reasoning) to mutable refs.

@dibblego Probably trying to fit too many points into a 140 char quip. I just want to suggest "impure" things can have good eq reasoning too