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: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus)
Subject: Re: next "big" language?? (disagree)
Date: 1996/06/24
Message-ID: <EACHUS.96Jun24181517@spectre.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 161964026
distribution: world
references: <JSA.96Jun18142249@organon.com> <dewar.835121649@schonberg>
organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA.
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>


In article <4ql1fv$5ss@goanna.cs.rmit.EDU.AU> 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"?

  How about:

         pragma Gospel(x);
      or pragma I_Tell_You_Three_Times(x);
         (after all, Lewis Carroll, under his real? name of Reverend Charles
          Dodgson, was a pioneer in Boolean logic... ;-)
   
     but I think:

     pragma Assume(x);

     captures the intent and meaning perfectly. ;-)

        Of course for the belt and suspenders types, we would then need:

     pragma Assert_and_then_Assume(x);

     to insure that the value of x didn't change between the assertion
check and the compiler assumption.  (And of course, the wording is to
make it clear that you can't backpropagate before the pragma.)

--

					Robert I. Eachus

with Standard_Disclaimer;
use  Standard_Disclaimer;
function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...