assume, assert, enforce, @safe

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 02:04:22AM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 08/02/2014 01:52 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 01:47:42AM +0200, Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >>On 08/02/2014 01:03 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >>>Actually, I'm thinking of ways of extending this even further, ...
> >>
> >>Note that the official stance has been that such things are
> >>obviously ridiculous if not checked dynamically in non-release mode.
> >
> >Nothing stops the compiler in non-release mode from computing the
> >expression both ways and comparing them to see if they match.
> >
> >
> >T
> >
> 
> Side effects. Multiplication of the runtime in non-release builds.

True. I haven't really thought through how to address all those details
yet. The final design may not quite behave exactly the way I described.
But it's a direction I'd like to go in, because I think there's a lot of
potential here.


> Btw, I don't think one can use == to express those rewrites.

It's just hypothetical syntax.  The point is that it's a hinting system
to provide extra reduction rules to the optimizer that is impractical
for the compiler to automatically deduce.


T

-- 
Claiming that your operating system is the best in the world because
more people use it is like saying McDonalds makes the best food in the
world. -- Carl B. Constantine