From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: f891f,9d58048b8113c00f
X-Google-Attributes: gidf891f,public
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,b20bb06b63f6e65
X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2e71cf22768a124d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,9d58048b8113c00f
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 10cc59,9d58048b8113c00f
X-Google-Attributes: gid10cc59,public
From: "Marc C. Brooks" <marcb@crl.com>
Subject: Re: next "big" language?? (disagree)
Date: 1996/06/26
Message-ID: <01bb6320.71fe11c0$03744ba8@micron>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 162214080
references: <JSA.96Jun18142249@organon.com> <dewar.835121649@schonberg>
 <dewar.835306677@schonberg> <4ql1fv$5ss@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>
organization: Phydeaux Software, Inc
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.pascal,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-06-26T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>




> Obviously if there are two concepts, then we should have two names. For
> example (in Ada) we could stick with
> 
> 	pragma Assert(x);
> 
> for the traditional "please check this really is the case" assertion
> and introduce
> 
> 	pragma Fact(x);
> 
> (or some other name) for the "this really is true, trust me, and make
> appropriate optimisations" type assertion. Can anyone think of a better
> name (pragma Declare(x) is not available in Ada) than "Fact"?

I would like pragma Check(x); for the assertion must be true or abort
type, and pragma Fact(x); for the other kind, MERELY to avoid the use of
Assert in either case.  This would insure that extraligual knowledge would
be suppressed.

Marc