DIP 1009--Improve Contract Usability--Preliminary Review Round 2 Begins

[Moritz Maxeiner via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 21 July 2017 at 13:51:05 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> DIP 1009 is titled "Improve Contract Usability".
>
> [...]
>
> Destroy!

I really like how the syntax turned out. My only remaining peeve 
is the `ContractParameters` nomenclature in the grammar section, 
because it implies that asserts are contracts. If contracts and 
asserts share a common grammar rule, imho the rule's name should 
be agnostic to either of them, like `ConditionalParameters`. In 
any case, it's a complaint on a very high level and arguably not 
relevant to any end user (as usually no one other than compiler 
people look at the grammar rules, anyway).
Thanks for the time invested in the DIP!