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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fc6f9338f3a892fe X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public Path: controlnews3.google.com!news2.google.com!fu-berlin.de!cs.tu-berlin.de!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail From: Georg Bauhaus Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: A couple of questions Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 11:30:43 +0000 (UTC) Organization: GMUGHDU Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1083497443 17810 134.91.1.34 (2 May 2004 11:30:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 11:30:43 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00 (9000/800)) Xref: controlnews3.google.com comp.lang.ada:179 Date: 2004-05-02T11:30:43+00:00 List-Id: Martin Dowie wrote: :> The names have been changed from Precondition and Postcondition, :> unfortunatly, falling short of customary Ada names' quality in my view. : : These are not going to be in the next language revision - they are : "No Action". The "Assert" pragma is however going to make it, so : I guess you could make an arguement that the user can mimic pre : and post conditions them selves, with some disapline, e.g. Ah, yes. I've just taken another look and there seems to be some hope for DbC fans, expressed in AI-286: "It anticipates proposals for additional assertion-like pragmas for subprogram call pre and post conditions, and type and package oriented invariants. These will be discussed in separate AIs." -- Georg