Hi Fleshgrinder
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:42 AM, Fleshgrinder wrote:
> Is there a reason why you think that Design by Contract (DbC) should be
> implemented via annotations/attributes?
It's not complement of DbC, although it could be used.
Basic DbC idea is "Do validations always and fully duri
On 4/28/2016 11:15 PM, Stanislav Malyshev wrote:
> I think we should not try to be Haskell, Scala and Eiffel at the same
> time. DbC is not something most of the users of the language require and
> would ever use, unlike Eiifel where it is major part of what the
> language is. Giving a possibility
Hi!
> I personally think that such a system should be implemented directly in
> the language, like Eiffel has it. I even think that it would be easy to
I think we should not try to be Haskell, Scala and Eiffel at the same
time. DbC is not something most of the users of the language require and
wo
Is there a reason why you think that Design by Contract (DbC) should be
implemented via annotations/attributes?
I personally think that such a system should be implemented directly in
the language, like Eiffel has it. I even think that it would be easy to
add it without any BC. It might be a bit m
