C++ Logo


Advanced search

Re: [wg14/wg21 liaison] [isocpp-sg21] Telecon to review P2388R1 Minimum Contract Support: either Ignore or Check_and_abort

From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2021 10:42:07 +0300
On Wed, 22 Sept 2021 at 00:02, Jens Maurer via Liaison
<liaison_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> (Personally, I think contracts should be a first-level
> language feature that should not be hidden inside an
> attribute-looking syntax atrocity. At least in C++,
> the space where they are does allow for context-sensitive
> keywords without much hassle; cf. override and final.)

Well, yeah.. if we were to entertain a contract declaration preceding
the decl-specifier,
so that it could do forward-lookup for the parameters, then the case
for an attribute-like
syntax would be relatively strong. If the contract declaration has to
appear where context-sensitive
keywords appear, then why not use a context-sensitive keyword?

Received on 2021-09-22 02:42:20