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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ken Garlington <kennieg@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Usefullness of design-by-contract (was Re: The stupidity of all
 the Ariane 5 analysts.)
Date: 1997/07/22
Message-ID: <33D43E70.2672@flash.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 258082421
References: <33C835A5.362A@flash.net> <33CEAF05.6389@flash.net>
 <33D2827B.41C67EA6@eiffel.com> <33d38a16.195337670@news.geccs.gecm.com>
 <5r1drj$8ih@jupiter.milkyway.org>
Organization: Flashnet Communications, http://www.flash.net
Reply-To: kennieg@flash.net
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-07-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jim Cochrane wrote:
> 
> Now perhaps I am biased and am not aware of valid counterarguments, but
> I am not able to see how the method that would result from making use
> of these assumptions, called design-by-contract in this discussion, would
> not significantly increase the quality of a system of substantial size, in
> the sense of producing a system that correctly fulfills its requirements.

For counterarguments, see:

   http://www.progsoc.uts.edu.au/~geldridg/eiffel/ariane/