# Bug in doc system? And question on "pure" \[in docs\]; meaning Julia 1.0 is close?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/bug-in-doc-system-and-question-on-pure-in-docs-meaning-julia-1-0-is-close/11292>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Tags:** question, documentation\
**Created:** [May 31, 2018, 2:35pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/bug-in-doc-system-and-question-on-pure-in-docs-meaning-julia-1-0-is-close/11292 "2018-05-31T14:35:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mbauman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mbauman/32/31082_2.png) [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)\
**Post date:** [May 31, 2018, 3:49pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/bug-in-doc-system-and-question-on-pure-in-docs-meaning-julia-1-0-is-close/11292/5 "2018-05-31T15:49:56Z")

</div>

We should probably just remove `@pure` from the description in that NEWS item. It’s an unnecessary implementation detail.

`@pure` itself is totally distinct from either the `Val` change or broadcasting. It’s an internal macro that has an _extremely high_ standard for purity. So high, in fact, that almost nobody should use it other than Jameson. As such, it is not exported for general use.

Edit: [https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27349](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27349)

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/bug-in-doc-system-and-question-on-pure-in-docs-meaning-julia-1-0-is-close/11292)._