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, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e5c102037393131 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: Assertions Date: 1999/05/22 Message-ID: <7i7ei9$93v$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 481007025 References: <3736D243.1EEBF1AB@globalnet.co.uk> <3736F549.E3DDCDEB@pwfl.com> <7h83lc$rd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3739CECA.6A49865B@averstar.com> <1999May12.163911.1@eisner.decus.org> <373c862b@eeyore.callnetuk.com> <3742eba5@eeyore.callnetuk.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x31.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 129.37.79.66 Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. X-Article-Creation-Date: Sat May 22 23:28:10 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-05-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article , Ray Blaak wrote: > > I would suggest the name "Verify" for assertions intended to > be runtime checks, and "Assume" for assertions intended to > give info to the compiler. In any case, this thread should have adequately demonstrated that (a) this is quite a tricky subject (b) it is not easy to propose a solution that gets any kind of consensus agreement. This has always been the case when this issue has been discussed, so it is hardly surprising to see it happening again :-) --== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==-- ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---