Re: DIP 1009--Improve Contract Usability--Preliminary Review Round 1

[jmh530 via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 22 June 2017 at 18:57:40 UTC, MysticZach wrote:
[snip]

I don't mind that so much, but you made a good point earlier on 
how out would work with it.

The whole double parentheses is a bit ugly to me. Is there any 
problem with
out(return > 0)
instead of
out(r) (r > 0)

Also, I can see the point of Critique 5 in the DIP for not 
including in/out anywhere and wanting to pin it to the top of the 
body. The suggestion in your post at least succeeds at that.