assert semantic change proposal

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 6 August 2014 at 22:28:08 UTC, Artur Skawina via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> D already has `static assert`, which can be used for 
> compile-time checks.

The static modifier would just be a modifier to the regular 
c-style assert that basically tells the compiler to refuse to add 
run-time checks.

* static assert:  prove this or stop compilation

* assert: prove this or emit runtime check

* assume: define this to hold

> OTOH the extremely dangerous assert->assume redefinition seems 
> to be seriously considered, despite the grave consequences...

Well, I don't worry. It just means that some people, who believe 
in the concept, are going to spend a lot of effort on something 
that probably does not pay off. It would be a lot better if they 
rather spent some effort in adding sound annotations, like 
bearophile argues for, though. It could be put it to good use by 
annotating foreign functions

Keep in mind that this is an issue that is easy to fix in a 
private fork. It is a small modification to turn "d-assert" into 
"assume" and add a "c-assert". It requires no changes to D code?