{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreifvqegwqsia3zyemas5zwzii4cge2di2yvptgo6bycifqlolplmyy",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:ivbknywyskln22er3nkssdhl/app.bsky.feed.post/3mpruuq2acyt2"
  },
  "path": "/t/language-vision-regarding-safety-guarantees/24418?page=3#post_51",
  "publishedAt": "2026-07-03T23:19:59.000Z",
  "site": "https://internals.rust-lang.org",
  "textContent": "tczajka:\n\n> Safety requirements are simply the part of the (single) contract\n\nThis is unproductive terminology bikeshed, right? I hope you see that your single contract is made of a logic part (with requirements and guarantees) and a safety part (with requirements). And I hope you are able to unambiguously map those to \"logic contract\" and \"safety contract\", otherwise I'm not sure it's worth continuing to reply to this thread.",
  "title": "Language vision regarding safety guarantees"
}