bearophile wrote: > Christopher Bergqvist: >> I would prefer it if assert() didn't have this special type of behavior, and >> that a "halt" keyword or equivalent was introduced. What do you think? > > A halt() intrinsic from sounds indeed cleaner. But I don't know if Walter is > willing to add a keyword just for this purpose. > > Bye > bearophile
assert(halt)? (thinking of scope) I agree btw, this is very error prone.
