On Wednesday, 21 June 2017 at 09:10:33 UTC, MysticZach wrote:
On Wednesday, 21 June 2017 at 05:19:26 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Umm... I think we're not quite on the same page here. What
*else* are people supposed to use inside their contracts
besides the built-in assert??
I believe `assert` would have to be extremely robust to merit
being included directly into the syntax of the language. I'm
not opposed to this in principle. But I'm no expert, and not
willing to assume it's desirable. On the other hand, if
`assert` were made so perfect as to ensure that no one would
prefer a different method of bailing out of their programs,
then you're right, and the problem of contract syntax could be
solved at that level instead of the more "pedestrian" approach
I'm taking.
So weird how this discussion is happening in parallel with this
other discussion :-) :
http://forum.dlang.org/post/rkdpuuggltowhqmcm...@forum.dlang.org
