• Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> Oct 14 2005
• "Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> Oct 14 2005
• Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> Oct 14 2005

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

In: for preconditions
Out: for postconditions

Also, it might be nice if inline comments were labeled as being a part of
in/out/body if contracts are present.


Sean

"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> writes:

"Sean Kelly" <sean f4.ca> wrote in message
news:dip2pc$j38$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In: for preconditions
 Out: for postconditions

 Also, it might be nice if inline comments were labeled as being a part of
 in/out/body if contracts are present.


But preconditions are part of "Params" and postconditions are part of
"Returns".

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

In article <dip9p9$ooa$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
"Sean Kelly" <sean f4.ca> wrote in message
news:dip2pc$j38$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In: for preconditions
 Out: for postconditions

 Also, it might be nice if inline comments were labeled as being a part of
 in/out/body if contracts are present.


But preconditions are part of "Params" and postconditions are part of
"Returns".


I agree for the most part, though I've noticed that not all of my preconditions
are  related to input parameters--some check certain aspects of object state (it
is a logic error to call Thread.start() multiple times, for example).  I suppose
an invariant could handle this for the out clause, however, so perhaps adding
in/out sections isn't quite right after all.  I may just document these
requirements in the function description instead.


Sean