Alix Pexton wrote: > On 24/06/2010 09:09, Jonathan M Davis wrote: >> Alix Pexton wrote: >> >>> Can someone sanity check me on the code on pages 334-5? >>> >>> Does the method push really need !empty in its in contract? >>> >>> I might not be fully awake yet>< >>> >>> A... >> >> It has to be an error. If you couldn't push onto an empty stack, then >> you'd never be able to put anything on the stack. >> >> - Jonathan M Davis > > That's what I thought, but it's there in the example over the page as > well, so I though maybe I was missing something >< > > A...
I haven't look at it in detail yet, but it definitely looks like it's a copy-paste error, and it makes no sense for a push function to insist that something have already been pushed before you can push anything onto the stack. - Jonathan M Davis
