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=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada 2012 Constraints (WRT an Ada IR) Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 13:52:40 +0100 Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server Message-ID: References: <999c67b0-4478-4d2b-8108-32ac48fe6316@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: vZYCW951TbFitc4GdEwQJg.user.gioia.aioe.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.5.1 X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2 Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:32817 Date: 2016-12-14T13:52:40+01:00 List-Id: On 14/12/2016 13:44, G.B. wrote: > On 14/12/2016 12:25, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote: > >> That is the problem with implied contracts. Is this legal: >> >> begin >> loop >> X (Read (Stream)); >> end loop; >> exception >> when Constraint_Error => >> null; >> end; > > "Assertions are not an input checking mechanism" > "To avoid a common misunderstanding, make sure to note > that each of the contracts discussed holds between a routine > (the supplier) and another routine (its caller): we are concerned > about software-to-software communication, not software-to-human > or software-to-outside-world. (...) Here there is no substitute > for the usual condition-checking constructs, include the venerable > IF ... THEN ...; the exception handling mechanism ... may also be > helpful ". [1] > > [1] Meyer, Bertrand: OOSC2, 2nd ed, ยง11.6 Is it legal or not? -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de