David Flanagan wrote:
> If there is no way to turn assertions off, and since the spec requires
> the parentheses around the assertion, I don't see what is gained by
> making this a expression instead of a global function. If all this spec
> offers is standardization of the error reporting information in the
> exception objects, I'm not sure that's worth it.
Replying to myself here... Is the reason for an assert expression
instead of an assert function that not having a method invocation makes
a difference for performance?
Instead of adding 'assert' to the language, have you considered adding
an 'assertion' keyword instead?
assertion x > 0, 'x must be positive'
This would be syntax sugar to create an invokeable object with an
associated message or exception. The expression doesn't get evaluated
unless the assertion is actually invoked or asserted or tested... A
global assert() method could then accept assertion objects and either
invoke them or ignore them. I'm not sure how the performance of this
would compare to just having regular assertion always on, though.
Treating assertions as objects does allow programmers to do things like
start attaching arrays of preconditions and postconditions to methods.
I suspect this is all too complicated, though. My feeling is that if
assertions can't be done right (and that includes turning them off) they
shouldn't be done at all.
David
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
