Another idiom I wish were gone from phobos/druntime

[Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 5 February 2015 at 00:35:50 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Contracts can be read by tools, and they are part of the 
> function signature. Contracts should be encouraged and 
> increased, not discouraged.


I agree. Moreover, if the assert fails in the contract, in 
theory, we can point the error at the user's code. An assert 
inside the function is the function's responsibility. An assert 
in an in contract is the caller's responsibility. They're 
semantically different (even if dmd treats them the same way)