Temporary suspension of disbelief (invariant)

[Ellery Newcomer]

On 10/26/2010 07:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>
> An invariant that is not invariant is a meaningless attribute. It's like
> "logical constness" where classes claim to be const but aren't.

an invariant which isn't used because it is too strict isn't much better.

Example:

class with some sort of state and public property function which grabs a 
bit out of some field or something

inside method, state violates invariant and I can't call this property 
function

I needed to use the property function, but I also needed the invariant 
so I shoehorned it into a regular function and explicitly made the 
calls. Ugly.

Though I suppose it was a slightly different case than what bearophile 
is proposing