I mean a lot of work designing this concept properly, writing RFC,
discussing, coming to consensus, etc
The implementation itself may be quite simple.
If anyone can take care about design, I may help with implementation.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Yasuo Ohgaki <yohg...@ohgaki.net> wrote:
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:25 PM, Dmitry Stogov <dmi...@zend.com> wrote:
>
>> The idea of that RFC was an ability to have zero-cost assert().
>>
>> DbC is a much more bigger feature, it is interesting, but requires
>> significant work.
>
>
> Type check and DbC integration would require significant work, I guess.
> If you say so, it is.
>
> How about simple in{}, out{} block? I expect it's much simpler.
> Injecting in{} and out{} block code to before/after execute() something
> like this.
> If execute() is replaceable as before, then we may have two execute()
> for production and development. There will be zero performance cost
> hopefully.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Yasuo Ohgaki
> yohg...@ohgaki.net
>
