Gregg,
> Is there a reason you're using two separate steps, rather than something
> like this:
>
> x: copy reduce ['require pre]
> y: copy reduce ['ensure post 'result]
None. As I said I am in the process of learning and some of the idioms
are not there yet when I need them. :-)
Thanks!
> Also, what do you think about ordering the parameters to CONTRACT in the
> order that they are applied (as it were): spec pre local body post ? I've
> also toyed with using refinements for specifying pre and post conditions,
> plus some other wacky function specification dialect ideas.
Interesting. Keep in touch. We should be able to selectively
enable/disable the assertion without side effects. But the side effects
are probably the best handled by script developers rather than by
DBC.
Thanks for the pointers to editors. I'll check them out.
Jan
--
To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the
subject, without the quotes.
