On 08/02/2014 02:04 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 01:59:29AM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 08/02/2014 01:46 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
OTOH, perhaps one way to work around this, is to have a function with
an in-contract compile into a preamble and a body:
int func(int x)
in { assert(x > 5); }
body {
return computeResult(x);
}
would compile to the equivalent of:
int __func_incontract(int x) {
assert(x > 5);
goto __func_body; // fall through to __func_body
}
int __func_body(int x) {
return computeResult(x);
}
In non-release mode, calls to func would get translated into calls to
__func_incontract,
What if a library function was compiled in release mode?
The compiler always emits the in-contract,
I know.
so the library would carry all the in-contracts.
Indeed.
If the user code doesn't actually use them, then
the linker just doesn't link them in at link time.
...
I was trying to half-jokingly make a pedantic point about the nature of
"the equivalent of: [...] assert(x > 5); [...]" in release mode.
Another issue is that if one just emits the above lowering, the
optimizers might not be able to assume the in contract correct on entry
of __func__body without further precautions.
