Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 23:10:13 +0300
On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 at 23:02, Tom Honermann <tom_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Gettting warmer, yes. There's also a concern which of these things
> should be the default.
>
> Are you unhappy with [intro.compliance.general]p8?
>
> It is implementation-defined whether the implementation is a hardened implementation. If it is a hardened implementation, violating a hardened precondition results in a contract violation ([structure.specifications]).
That has nothing to do with what form of contract declarations is the
default. And while I'm not completely unhappy as such with that
particular part of the specification,
I am very unhappy with the part of the library specification that then
allows 'observe' for a hardened implementation, and the paper I wrote
proposes to change
that wording.
> Gettting warmer, yes. There's also a concern which of these things
> should be the default.
>
> Are you unhappy with [intro.compliance.general]p8?
>
> It is implementation-defined whether the implementation is a hardened implementation. If it is a hardened implementation, violating a hardened precondition results in a contract violation ([structure.specifications]).
That has nothing to do with what form of contract declarations is the
default. And while I'm not completely unhappy as such with that
particular part of the specification,
I am very unhappy with the part of the library specification that then
allows 'observe' for a hardened implementation, and the paper I wrote
proposes to change
that wording.
Received on 2025-10-14 20:10:26
