[quote="asmodehn, post:4, topic:2405"]
The contracts as described seems to be a weak version of a specification + model checker (check TLA+) that could also be integrated with a ROS system, but the effort required for the potential users is probably prohibitive
[/quote]
Yes, it's specification and model checking. If the effort required for the potential users is prohibitive depens heavily on the domain and environmental conditions they are acting in. I think one should give every possible user as much optional technical possibilities to work with as possible. If users make use of the concepts offered is their choice.
[quote="asmodehn, post:4, topic:2405"]
Before doing contracts, I would first focus on proper, static (since message structure is static), strong, typing (despite the default weak/dynamic typing of the supported languages, it is doable using existing libraries, like for C++ and Python - and even LISPs).
[/quote]
I agree that static strong typing is very important. However from an integration point of view I wouldn't consider "Design By Contract" less important. DbC helps to avoid "higher level" interaction issues in addition to typing issues. But as DbC would require many features to be most effective w.r.t. to effort static strong typing could probably be achieved faster.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/design-by-contract/2405/6) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)