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: 10cc59,9d58048b8113c00f
X-Google-Attributes: gid10cc59,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,9d58048b8113c00f
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
From: adam@irvine.com (Adam Beneschan)
Subject: Re: next "big" language?? (disagree)
Date: 1996/06/24
Message-ID: <4qmpfh$ske@krusty.irvine.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 161893150
distribution: world
references: <dewar.835121649@schonberg> <dewar.835306677@schonberg>
 <4ql1fv$5ss@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU>
organization: /z/news/newsctl/organization
newsgroups: 
 comp.lang.pascal,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-06-24T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Dale Stanbrough <dale@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> writes:
 >
 >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"?
 >

"Fantasy"?

For many programmers, this would be a more appropriate pragma name.

:)
                                -- Adam