On 28/06/10 12:59, bearophile wrote:
Norbert Nemec:
[...] to place code for input contract checking in the *calling* code. [...]
Output contract checks, on the other hand should be compiled inside the
returning routine.
Is this a positive thing to do? Can this be done? (D must support separate
Norbert Nemec Wrote:
> On 28/06/10 12:59, bearophile wrote:
> > Norbert Nemec:
> >> [...] to place code for input contract checking in the *calling* code.
> >> [...]
> >> Output contract checks, on the other hand should be compiled inside the
> >> returning routine.
> >
> > Is this a positive thi
On 30/06/10 17:45, Sean Kelly wrote:
Norbert Nemec Wrote:
On 28/06/10 12:59, bearophile wrote:
Norbert Nemec:
[...] to place code for input contract checking in the *calling* code. [...]
Output contract checks, on the other hand should be compiled inside the
returning routine.
Is this a pos
On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 20:03:07 +0100, Norbert Nemec wrote:
> On 30/06/10 17:45, Sean Kelly wrote:
>> Norbert Nemec Wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/06/10 12:59, bearophile wrote:
Norbert Nemec:
> [...] to place code for input contract checking in the *calling*
> code. [...] Output contract checks, o
Jay Byrd:
> This is all very confused, and is reflected in D implementing contracts all
> wrong.
If you know well the ideas of DbC, and you think there are some problems in the
DbC of D2, then I suggest you to not just write what's wrong, why it is wrong
and what bad things such wrong design ma
> then I suggest you to not just write what's...
Ignore that 'not', please.
Sat, 11 Sep 2010 07:16:56 -0400, bearophile wrote:
> Jay Byrd:
>> This is all very confused, and is reflected in D implementing contracts
>> all wrong.
>
> If you know well the ideas of DbC, and you think there are some problems
> in the DbC of D2, then I suggest you to not just write what's wron
On 11/09/10 08:18, Jay Byrd wrote:
Contracts do not belong to function pointers or any other
dynamic state -- they apply to the invoker, and thus the static type.
Isn't that obvious?
In fact, it is yet one step more complex than that: as the name itself
suggests, contracts are "between" the ca
Norbert Nemec:
Thank you for your clear explanations of the situation.
> With FP/DG, this breaks
> down and I believe the best one can do is to implement contracts as
> run-time checks in the callee, just as it is done in D.
There is also a mixed strategy: to use run-time checks in the callee
On 12/09/10 14:48, bearophile wrote:
Norbert Nemec:
Thank you for your clear explanations of the situation.
With FP/DG, this breaks
down and I believe the best one can do is to implement contracts as
run-time checks in the callee, just as it is done in D.
There is also a mixed strategy: to u
10 matches
Mail list logo
