Well, I do use contracts for the vast majority of the code in the science collection.  I think it's a good way to capture most of the constraints within real code.  But, I still like being able to accept the consequences of not using it.  And, if someone chooses to bypass it, the term "unchecked-" in the identifier is as good a clue as I know how to give.  I'm open to suggestions.<br> <br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 10:50 AM, Matthias Felleisen <<a href="mailto:matthias@ccs.neu.edu">matthias@ccs.neu.edu</a>> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div style=""><div class="Ih2E3d"> <br><div><div>On Jan 25, 2008, at 12:43 PM, Doug Williams wrote:</div><br><blockquote type="cite"><span style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px;">I also don't recommend calling the unchecked version of the code unless you are TOTALLY willing to accept the consequences. </span></blockquote> </div><br><div><br></div></div><div>I understand what you recommend but sadly, blame is primarily expressed by the error message. And if it says the error happened in your module, then the casual user will start debugging there. For all you know, the person who actually created the final product and is responsible for the unchecked calls isn't the user who discovers the bug. It's some innocent third-party client who bought the package for mega-bucks to run some Wall Street trading firm. </div> <div><br></div><font color="#888888"><div>-- Matthias</div><div><br></div></font></div></blockquote></div><br>