Hello all, I would like you to vote between one of the two options below. Which option do you prefer? (-) OPTION 1 requires programmers to repeat the function signature tokens twice -- in the function declaration and in the CONTRACT_FUNCTION() macro. (+) However, OPTION 1 seems to make the code more readable -- users not familiar with Boost.Contract can "skip" the tokens in the CONTRACT_FUNCTION() signature-sequence and just read the usual C++ function declaration. OPTION 1: The function declaration is programmed using the usual C++ syntax just before the CONTRACT_FUNCTION() macro. template<typename T> class myvector { CONTRACT_INVARIANT( ({ ... }) ) public: void push_back(const T& element) // Usual C++ push_back() declaration. CONTRACT_FUNCTION( (class) (copyable)(myvector) (public) (void) (push_back)( (const T&)(element) ) (precondition)({ ... }) (postcondition)({ ... }) (body)({ ... }) ) ... }; OPTION 2: The CONTRACT_FUNCTION() macro automatically programs also the function declaration. template<typename T> class myvector { CONTRACT_INVARIANT( ({ ... }) ) public: // No usual C++ push_back() declaration here. CONTRACT_FUNCTION( (class) (copyable)(myvector) (public) (void) (push_back)( (const T&)(element) ) (precondition)({ ... }) (postcondition)({ ... }) (body)({ ... }) ) ... }; Thank you. Lorenzo