assert and enforce both compiled out with -release

[Ali Çehreli]

On 01/27/2018 04:59 PM, lobo wrote:
 > On Saturday, 27 January 2018 at 22:53:37 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
 >> On 01/27/2018 10:33 AM, kdevel wrote:
 >>
 >>> I suggest the deletion of the sentence "Use assert in contracts."
 >>
 >> Done.
 >>
 >> Ali
 >
 > Wait, no this isn't right, is it?

It is right because that statement made one person to replace 'enforce's 
with 'asserts's.

 > Enforce should not be used in
 > contracts so the "Use assert in contracts" statement is correct and
 > should remain.

I don't think enforce documentation is the right place to get into such 
matters. Warning against a potential misuse is fine but hinting at 
"correct use of assert vs. enforce" is not only distracting but also 
misguiding.

 > I think the issue here is the OP is getting confused
 > between assert vs. exception.
 >
 > Contracts (in D) are used to define and assert the agreed logic
 > behaviour of the program code.
 >
 > Asserts catch logic bugs in the code that may lead to incorrect
 > behaviour at runtime. Exceptions are for exceptional cases that crop up
 > at runtime due to factors external to the code logic, e.g. invalid
 > external state such as failing to open a file or a sensor not going off
 > when it should because it is faulty.
 >
 > Asserts can be removed in -release code because it is assumed the logic
 > has been asserted correct during debug builds and testing. The same
 > reason compilers now are starting to optimise out code based on assert
 > conditions.
 >
 > bye,
 > lobo

All true.

Ali