Re: [boost] [contract] Contract Programming Library

Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] Contract Programming Library
From: Lorenzo Caminiti (lorcaminiti_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-06 07:19:51

Hi Thomas,

On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Thomas Klimpel
<Thomas.Klimpel_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> 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.

Indeed, [Ottosen2004] expresses a similar concern. I will add the
"false sense of security" concern to the library documentation in the
Contract Programming annex.

Personally, I have used Contract Programming in a couple of real
projects -- one of which, an embedded safety critical system with
~60,000 lines of C++.

Regards,
Lorenzo