>
> About teaching approaches, there are many. Do not assume that your
> approach (or may approach) is the only one.


I'm not sure where you got the impression that I've made this assumption.
What I wrote was liberally qualified with things like "I think" and "In my
opinion"

On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 at 14:18, JOSE DANIEL GARCIA SANCHEZ <
josedaniel.garcia_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> There is a tiny detail.
>
> The one who writes the contract might have not any control at all about
> whether observe is used or not with that contract.
>
> About teaching approaches, there are many. Do not assume that your
> approach (or may approach) is the only one.
>
> For what is worth I also do a lot of teaching both at University level and
> In-company training in different domains. I do not know if 25 years of
> teaching qualify as huge, or not.
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 3:12 PM Oliver Rosten <
> oliver.rosten_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> As someone who does a huge amount of teaching, I'm not sure I share the
>> concerns about the teachability of Observe.
>>
>> Indeed, I think the zeroth order teaching concern is getting people to
>> understand that (in my opinion) Contracts as a whole are a tool to be used
>> judiciously.
>>
>> If you're thinking of using Contracts without ever having thought
>> propeply about whether your functions have wide or narrow contracts (plenty
>> never have, in my experience) don't start rolling it out across your code
>> base.
>>
>> If you have given this thought before, or start thinking about it, then
>> work out where contracts are appropriate.
>>
>> Treat Observe as an expert-level feature. Only consider using it when you
>> have some confidence that you know what you're doing.
>>
>> In a different, but related thread, Louis gave a great example of how to
>> use Observe effectively when you have the expertise to do so.
>>
>> O.
>>
>> On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 at 13:53, JOSE DANIEL GARCIA SANCHEZ via SG21 <
>> sg21_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>> Some degree of consensus does not prevent problems arising in production
>>> code.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 2:00 PM René Ferdinand Rivera Morell <
>>> grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 6:37 AM JOSE DANIEL GARCIA SANCHEZ via SG15 <
>>>> sg15_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> About concern 10 (aka ES-047), please note that saying we discussed
>>>>> this before does not solve the problem.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It shows that the choice was made by consensus.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -- René Ferdinand Rivera Morell
>>>> -- Don't Assume Anything -- No Supongas Nada
>>>> -- Robot Dreams - http://robot-dreams.net
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>> SG21 mailing list
>>> SG21_at_[hidden]
>>> Subscription: https://lists.isocpp.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/sg21
>>> Link to this post: http://lists.isocpp.org/sg21/2025/10/11330.php
>>>
>>