> Am I totally on the wrong track here?
That depends on what you want your assumptions to do. This definitely
doesn't solve the problems I'm having implementing C++ contracts,
especially axioms, which can involve declarations of undecidable
functions. For example, is_reachable(p, q) for a pair of
I'd like to introduce a new builtin, __builtin_constant_function_p,
with nicer semantics and better performance than __builtin_constant_p.
Background:
I want to define an assert_or_assume() macro that is equivalent to
assume() or assert(), whichever results in better compiled code.
I'd like to
