Original title is "A framework for systematically addressing undefined behaviour in the C++ Standard". The HN title is misleading in two ways: - The paper cove

Original title is "A framework for systematically addressing undefined behaviour in the C++ Standard". The HN title is misleading in two ways: - The paper covers more than just implicit contract assertions - Implicit contract assertions are stated to cover only a (large) subset of UB in C++. Other techniques are needed to address UB that falls outside this subset. From the paper (italics in original): > In this section, we propose a framework that systematically introduces runtime checks and well-defined replacement behaviour — two of the tools that form the strategy presented in Section 3 — to the C++ Standard. Runtime checks guarding against core language UB are realised as implicit contract assertions And later: > Having specified precisely what an implicit contract assertion is and how it behaves, we can now apply that specification to every case of UB that is — at least in principle — checkable at run time. As we saw in Section 2, this is true for 77 cases, that is, 95% of all identified cases of explicit core language UB in C++.