Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] Contract Programming Library
From: Thomas Klimpel (Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-05 12:56:12
> Comments?
I like what I've seen so far. I also like the new name.
How about my interest in such a DbC library, and would I use it? I would be interested to see how DbC can be done in C++, and how it will feel. On the other hand, I "know" that I will not use DbC for "real" projects, even so I completely acknowledge the benefits it has with respect to documentation and testing. This is because testing is too important to focus on a single "random" aspect. The test requirements of different projects are so different that in principle testing should start with an investigation of the test requirements of the individual project. I fear that DbC would give a false sense of security with respect to testing. I have less problems with the documentation part of DbC, especially since it avoids the "obsolete" problem that typically plagues documentation.
Regards,
Thomas