P3290 R0 Integrating Existing Assertions With Contracts

[wg21bot]

P3290R0 Integrating Existing Assertions With Contracts (Joshua Berne, Timur Doumler, John Lakos)

[timuraudio]

Discussed by SG21 during telecon 2024-06-20. Design direction given, revision needed:

Poll 1 We are interested in adding a standard library API to directly and unconditionally trigger the contract-violation handling process. SF F N A SA 5 8 0 0 1 Result: Consensus

Poll 2 We are interested in providing an extension to the existing C assert macro that allows it to trigger the contract-violation handling process. SF F N A SA 3 8 1 1 0 Result: Consensus

Poll 3 We are interested in a new assertion kind which more closely reproduces the semantics of the C assert macro (such as, not featuring elision, duplication, or constification) while still being part of the Contracts facility. SF F N A SA 4 3 3 2 1 Result: Weak Consensus

[timuraudio]

St. Louis

We want to spend more time considering P3290R0 Proposals 1.1-1.3. SF F N A SA 11 4 1 1 0 Result: Consensus

Amend P3290R0 Proposals 1.1-1.3 to support an optional additional function argument that is a std::source_location. SF F N A SA 2 11 5 0 0 Result: Consensus

We want to spend more time considering P3290R0 Proposal 2. SF F N A SA 4 10 2 1 0 Result: Consensus

Amend P3290R0 Proposal 2 to have a control macro to opt into the assert macro calling the contract-violation handler, rather than making this choice implementation-defined. SF F N A SA 1 8 4 3 0 Result: Consensus

We want to spend more time considering P3290R0 Proposal 3. SF F N A SA 0 2 7 6 1 Result: Not consensus

We want to spend more time considering P3290R0 Proposal 3, in the post-MVP timeframe. SF F N A SA 0 6 6 4 0 Result: Not consensus