checkedint call removal

[Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d]

On 08/02/2014 04:41 AM, Chris Cain wrote:
> Here, I'll do you the favor of giving you a few more Google results with hopes that you'll
> start developing a mental model behind what the definition of assertion is:
> ...

Great, that's a lot more useful than the personal attacks. Thanks!

> Google itself: "state a fact or belief confidently and forcefully"
>
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assert: "to state with assurance, confidence, or force;
> state strongly or positively; affirm"
>
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/assert: "to state (something) in a strong and definite way"
>
> http://www.thefreedictionary.com/assert: "To state or express positively; affirm"
>
> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/assert: "State a fact or belief confidently and forcefully"
> ...

All of those do not imply that a fact is being expressed. Why can an 
assertion not be the forceful expression of e.g. a lie or a wrong 
belief, given those entries?

Some more:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/assertion: "a positive statement 
or declaration, often without support or reason: a mere assertion; an 
unwarranted assertion."

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/assertion: "1. The act of asserting.
2. Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or 
attempt at proof."

> http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/assert: "to state firmly that something is true"

>
> As a bonus, Googling "statement of fact" in case that isn't clear to you
> what that means (maybe that's what's throwing you for a loop?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

> You seem to be equating statement of fact and facts

Well no, I explicitly affirmed that there were different concepts:

On 08/02/2014 03:55 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> There is a difference between a fact and a statement of that fact, but ..


> so you've clearly got some
> understanding wrong for the definition of those two):

I also clarified how I understand the term, in order to give you the 
possibility of clearing up the misunderstanding in case this was to be 
the point of contention:

On 08/02/2014 03:55 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> A statement of FACT is a statement that expresses a fact. I.e. there is
> an existing fact, and the statement expresses this fact

This is part of any well-reasoned argument. I was applying utmost care 
to expose it as much in its entirety as I could in order to quickly find 
where the disagreement was coming from.

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_statements_of_fact
> ...

I already googled 'statement of fact' myself earlier, and found the 
wikipedia entry for 'fact', that I quoted back then:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fact

"The usual test for a statement of fact is verifiability, that is, 
whether it can be demonstrated to correspond to experience."

I.e. in order to determine whether something is a statement of fact, one 
should verify it. Do you agree that it is saying this?

> False statement of fact... You can't possibly suggest that there exists
> false facts, but false statements of facts do exist, proving that
> statement of fact != fact.

It is hard to tell from that article whether you have a point. It often 
uses the term 'false statement'. I.e. the term might parse like (false 
statement) of fact, and not false (statement of fact). Furthermore, this 
seems to be a legalese use. Legalese words often have distorted 
meanings. Do you think the legalese use of this term is relevant in the 
context of the current discussion? In any case, wouldn't the existence 
of false (statements of fact) contradict the wikipedia article on 'fact'?

Furthermore, if we actually assume for a short time that we may equate 
statement of fact and 'assertion' as you did in a previous post: aren't 
you now actually arguing for the position that assertions do not 
necessarily express facts?

There is also the following source:
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100816160837AAzpEBY

"Most statements fall into one of two categories: statements of fact and 
statements of opinion. Statements of fact are falsifiable. They can be 
either proven or disproven. Statements of opinion cannot be falsified."

This contradicts my interpretation, but I don't know what the legalese 
use is exactly.

there is another answer that says:
"Without looking it up, I'd say a "statement of fact" is simply speaking 
something that is true, compared to having an opinion about something.
Satement [sic!] of fact: The world is not flat.
Statement of opinion: The world is so messed up these days. "

This definition is similar to what I used, but it is explicitly 
qualified as non-authoritative.


Do you see why I think that the definition of 'assertion' in English is 
not sufficient to describe it's semantics as a programming language 
construct sufficiently well? Note, there is only one source that even 
mentions 'statement of fact' as part of the definition of 'assert', and 
it still leaves open alternatives so this entire sub-discussion is not 
very relevant to the original one.

If you decide to answer, feel free to point out exactly _where_ my 
reasoning is wrong or _where_ it is not clear enough, attack my 
reasoning if you must, but please do not attack me again.