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: 103376,1e5c102037393131
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ehud Lamm <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il>
Subject: Re: Assertions
Date: 1999/05/20
Message-ID: 
 <Pine.A41.3.96-heb-2.07.990520114314.161678A-100000@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 480321598
References: <3736D243.1EEBF1AB@globalnet.co.uk> <3736F549.E3DDCDEB@pwfl.com>
 <7h83lc$rd$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <3739CECA.6A49865B@averstar.com>
 <7hqe7m$q7i@sjx-ixn1.ix.netcom.com> <3742eba6@eeyore.callnetuk.com>
 <7hv6bb$1l9@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Organization: The hebrew University of Jerusalem
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-05-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Wed, 19 May 1999, Richard D Riehle wrote:

> I hope this helps to clarify the thinking behind some of my earlier 
> points. Let me be clear that I am not interested in turning Ada into
> Eiffel.  I am interested in seeing Ada learn from other language designs.
> I know that Tucker explored this idea in great depth during the design
> of Ada 95 and understands the pros and cons.  He did not lightly dismiss
> the notion of pre-, post, and invariant conditions.  It was a decision
> seriously studied and excluded from Ada 95 for very good reasons.
> 

Are there any documents about this design issue? I am very much interested
in DBC ("design by contract"), which I think is one of the nicest ideas in
SE. So why did Ada95 dismiss it?

Ehud Lamm     mslamm@pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il