Subject: Re: [boost] [contract] Broken postconditions on throw
From: Steven Watanabe (watanabesj_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-08-26 18:32:54
On 08/26/2012 12:10 PM, Andrzej Krzemienski wrote:
> Function set_weight() is intended to assign its (output) argument with a
> value representing weight (in the physical sense). We guarantee that the
> value we set is always non-negative. The function clumsily attempts to
> verify the condition itself (the line with *). It signals the failure with
> an exception, but unfortunately fails to satisfy the postcondition. I
> expect that this situation should be reported as a postcondition violation.
> But no violation is reported, and the program successfully outputs "CAUGHT
This doesn't violate the postcondition.
postconditions are only valid if the function
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk