Sounds great to me, anything that can be done to describe contracts in code should be done IMHO, and this would be very much along the lines of the good old Design By Contract thinking.
/peter www.oredev.se - Be there or be gone. GTalk: neubauer.peter Skype peter.neubauer ICQ 18762544 Phone +46704 106975 LinkedIn http://www.linkedin.com/in/neubauer Twitter http://twitter.com/peterneubauer http://www.neo4j.org - New Energy for Data - the Graph Database. http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open Participation Software. http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development. On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 7:43 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gang, > > Constraints on in-arguments is pretty cool and extremely useful. But, > should we perhaps even support a "Contract" on return values? So, that > the client can rest assure (via tools eventually) that certain things > can't happen (Null returns, negative values, whatever) > > Cheers > Niclas > > _______________________________________________ > qi4j-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev > > _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
