I love mailing list debugging.

And yes, perhaps we should call it "NoCheck" instead of "Ignore".

We've had a really difficult time figuring out how to word the whole thing. Andrzej, you think just removing the [note] bits would work?

On Fri, Sep 24, 2021 at 6:44 PM Ville Voutilainen via SG21 <sg21@lists.isocpp.org> wrote:
On Fri, 24 Sept 2021 at 19:49, Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@microsoft.com> 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.
_______________________________________________
SG21 mailing list
SG21@lists.isocpp.org
Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg21
Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/sg21/2021/09/1289.php