it's possible to achieve the same validation just with assert() spread over the code. It's nothing wrong with this, but this is not DbC.
The question, if we need DbC at all, is still open. Thanks. Dmitry. On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi! > > > Hello, internals! > > > > DbC is good thing, but the way you want to do this via language changes > is > > really awful. Why do you want to add more custom features into the > > Agreed here. I still don't see what's wrong with just putting the code > at the beginning of the function and whenever you want to check it. Why > this need to change the language syntax? OK, you don't like assert > because it's limited or performance-costly or whatever. We can fix that. > Why we need weird syntax that places function code in three different > places, reuses existing syntax constructs for things that have nothing > to do with their original use and look like Perl YAPH signature? I > understand implementing fashionable concepts is fun, but must they come > with weird syntax? Why can't we keep it simple? > > -- > Stas Malyshev > smalys...@gmail.com > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > >
