Re: leakproof

On 02/22/2012 11:14 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>  wrote:
>
>> Returning to the original point, I've come to the conclusion that
>> "pure" isn't the right way to go. The trouble with "leakproof" is
>> that it doesn't point to what it is that's not leaking, which is
>> information rather than memory, as many might imagine (and I did)
>> without further hints. I'm not sure any single English word would
>> be as descriptive as I'd like.
>
> Discreet?
>
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discreet
>
> I guess the risk is that people would confuse it with "discrete".
>

Yes, too confusing.

"silent" might be better along those lines.

cheers

andrew