What term would you use?

-- Gaby

________________________________
From: Ville Voutilainen <ville.voutilainen_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 10:44:08 AM
To: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]>
Cc: SG21 <sg21_at_[hidden]>; Jens Maurer <Jens.Maurer_at_[hidden]>; Aaron Ballman <aaron_at_[hidden]>; WG14/WG21 liaison mailing list <liaison_at_[hidden]>
Subject: Re: [isocpp-sg21] [wg14/wg21 liaison] Telecon to review P2388R1 Minimum Contract Support: either Ignore or Check_and_abort

On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 19:49, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> That scenario fails to satisfy the "well-formed program" predicate in my original message:
>
> >> Finally, for a well-formed program with well-defined behavior fed with the correct data, ignoring contracts (with diagnostics, if one wishes) would be a correct (if poor quality) implementation.
>
> 😊

"Ignore" starts to seem like a Really Bad Name for this, if you ask me.