Re: Proposal: pragma Assumption

["Santiago Urueña" <suruena@gmail.com>]

> Yes, it is; just change the build script to pass the right compiler
> option.
>
> The only "fix" for actively malicious programmers is firing them.
>
Every language feature involves some trade offs. Is it worth adding
the "overriding" keyword at the cost of introducing a backwards
incompatibility and requiring to change the lexer and the syntax
processing of current compilers, furthermore if the same can be
checked using formal annotations and a external ASIS tool? I'm not
comparing the utility of pragma Assumption with the overriding keyword
(which is a great adition IMHO), but the costs of implementing them to
a compiler are neither the same: it is fairly cheap to add another
pragma so similar to pragma Assert. And the results would be relative
high considering the costs: adding support to a common programming
practice, in a standardized way, and with less risks than nowadays.

So, should it be added to Ada? I don't know, that's why I'm asking
here: first to the Ada community, to know whether programmers think it
is useful, and after that to the ARG who will decide if it should be
added or not to the language. The first step wasn't bad: nobody of the
(few) people who replied said that he wouldn't use it (but a lot of
answers were more focused on achieving the same effects without adding
more features to the language). But I think I will follow Randy's
advice, creating a patch for the future GNAT GPL 2008 (let's see if it
is really easy to implement or not... :-) and distributing it here.

Cheers,

--
Santiago Urueña-Pascual
Technical University of Madrid (UPM)