On 07/31/2014 09:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Thursday, 31 July 2014 at 18:43:49 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 7/31/14, 4:37 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/30/2014 4:05 PM, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 7/30/14, 7:01 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
I'd like to sum up my position and intent on all this.
7. using enforce() to check for program bugs is utterly wrong.
enforce()
is a library creation, the core language does not recognize it.
What do you suggest to use to check program bugs?
assert()
Then you are potentially releasing programs with bugs that are of
undefined behavior, instead of halting the program immediately.
Then don't build with -release. You can even build with
-boundscheck=safe if you want to turn off bounds checking in @system
code like -release does. IIRC, the only things that -release does are
disable assertions,
No, according to the OP -release assumes assertions to be true.
disable contracts, turn assert(0) into a halt
instruction, and disable bounds checking in @system and @trusted code.
So, if you want to keep the assertions and contracts and whatnot in,
Unfortunately, if used pervasively, assertions and contracts and whatnot
may actually hog the speed of a program in a way that breaks the deal.
Disabling assertions (and whatnot), assuming assertions to be true (and
disabling whatnot) and leaving all assertions and whatnot in are
different trade-offs, of which assuming all assertions to be true is the
most dangerous one. Why hide this behaviour in '-release'?
just don't use -release and use -boundscheck=safe to get the bounds
checking changes that -release does.
- Jonathan M Davis
This leaves assertions and contracts in though.
