On Saturday, 27 January 2018 at 18:00:32 UTC, rjframe wrote:
I think I see what you mean; you interpret "use asserts, because enforce will be compiled out" to imply that asserts wouldn't be compiled out, correct?
Is there any other meaningful interpretation?
Since, in reality, both would be compiled out, it shouldn't matter what you use, so the docs shouldn't care. That makes sense.
That's precisely my point.
The documentation seems to assume the reader has certain expectations of assert and enforce[0], so each function expresses a different intention to the programmer; when I see `assert()` I expect those checks only in non- release mode; when I see `enforce()` I expect those checks regardless of the flags that have been set[1]. Placing `enforce` in a contract messes with that expectation.
Right.
What language here would make more sense to you? Anything I can come up with is either awkward or pretty verbose.
I suggest the deletion of the sentence "Use assert in contracts."
