From: "Kent Paul Dolan" <xanthian@well.com>
Subject: Implied Programming contracts: Upping the ante (was): ToString?
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2002 22:23:16 +0000 (UTC)
Date: 2002-04-06T22:23:16+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9ae97cff4b13340d5aee875c95e2c7de.48257@mygate.mailgate.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: pan.2002.04.05.20.08.08.287482.22587@jps-nospam.net
"Eric G. Miller" <egm2@jps-nospam.net> wrote:
> I'm not sure this is even topical in this newgroup.
Well, sure it is. The question of whether a programming language has,
or needs, implied contracts (or explicit ones, like Eiffel's) is always
on topic if the discussion is eventually hauled back from "but look how
much better language Y does it" to some positive proposals for language
X.
xanthian.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-06 22:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-12 13:16 ToString? Nazgul
2002-03-12 13:24 ` ToString? Peter Hermann
2002-03-12 13:25 ` ToString? Ingo Marks
2002-03-12 13:27 ` ToString? Larry Hazel
2002-03-12 13:30 ` ToString? Martin Dowie
2002-03-12 16:48 ` ToString? Jeffrey Carter
2002-03-13 8:38 ` ToString? Martin Dowie
2002-03-13 22:18 ` ToString? Jeffrey Carter
2002-03-14 0:36 ` ToString? Adrian Knoth
2002-03-15 4:58 ` Upping the ante (was): ToString? Kent Paul Dolan
2002-03-15 5:22 ` Jim Rogers
2002-04-04 23:21 ` Kent Paul Dolan
2002-04-05 5:09 ` Eric G. Miller
2002-04-05 19:45 ` Kent Paul Dolan
2002-04-06 4:07 ` Eric G. Miller
2002-04-06 22:23 ` Kent Paul Dolan [this message]
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox