Bug 5024 – Order of execution of invariant and pre/post conditions

This is a D2 program that uses Contracts: import std.c.stdio: printf; class Foo { int x = 0; invariant() { printf("Foo invariant: %d\n", x); assert(x >= 0); } this() { printf("Foo constructor: %d\n", x); x = 0; } void setX(int newx) in { printf("Foo.setX precondition: %d\n", newx); assert(newx >= 0); } out { printf("Foo.setX postcondition: %d\n", x); assert(x == newx); } body { printf("Foo.setX body\n"); x = newx; } } void main() { auto c = new Foo(); c.setX(10); } This is the output of the program, DMD 2.049: Foo constructor: 0 Foo invariant: 0 Foo.setX precondition: 10 Foo invariant: 0 Foo.setX body Foo invariant: 10 Foo.setX postcondition: 10 But I think the Foo.setX precondition needs to run after the Foo invariant, and the Foo.setX postcondition has to run before the Foo invariant. See bug 5023 See also bug 3578 and bug 3856

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of issue 5023 ***

It's not a duplicate. Issue 5023 asks to document something, and this issue asks to make that something in a different way. A discussion thread: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=155592

Walter has said: > My reasoning is it (1) doesn't make any difference and (2) it's always > been like that - and if it did make a difference, it would break 10 years > of existing code. A note: this issue is of a list of about twenty issues that I especially care about. Essentially *all* of them are little/tiny breaking changes like this one.