Improve "Improve Contract Syntax" DIP 1009

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 11/1/17 11:11 PM, Meta wrote:
> On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 22:04:10 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> We're having difficulty reviewing 
>> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1009.md. The value 
>> is there, but the informal and sometimes flowery prose affects the 
>> document negatively. There are some unsupported claims and detailed 
>> description is sketchy. We need a careful pass that replaces the 
>> unclear or imprecise statements with clear, straightforward scientific 
>> claims.
>>
>> Can anyone help with this? For example, the first paragraph:
>>
>> "D has already made a significant commitment to the theory of Contract 
>> Programming, by means of its existing in, out, and invariant 
>> constructs. But limitations remain to their usability, both in their 
>> syntax and in their implementation. This DIP addresses only the syntax 
>> aspect of those limitations, proposing a syntax which makes in, out, 
>> and invariant contracts much easier to read and write."
>>
>> could be:
>>
>> "The D language supports Contract Programming by means of its in, out, 
>> and invariant constructs. Their current syntactic form is 
>> unnecessarily verbose. This DIP proposes improvements to the contract 
>> syntax that makes them easier to read and write."
>>
>> The change:
>>
>> * eliminates the entire "implementation sucks" allegation which seems 
>> taken straight from a forum flamewar;
>>
>> * replaces adjective-laden language with simple and precise statements;
>>
>> * provides a brief factual overview of what follows.
>>
>> Who wants to help?
>>
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> This actually makes the DIP slightly longer but hopefully makes it more 
> clear.
> 
> https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/pull/95
> 
> I'm heading off to bed so I won't be able to respond right away to 
> suggested changes.

Thanks! We're still looking for sizeable improvements. Any volunteers, 
please holler. -- Andrei