From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!husc6!necntc!cullvax!drw
From: drw@cullvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: language problem
Message-ID: <1062@cullvax.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Apr-87 13:08:56 EST
Article-I.D.: cullvax.1062
Posted: Wed Apr  8 13:08:56 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Apr-87 09:08:29 EST
Organization: Cullinet Software, Inc., Westwood, MA
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

keith@telesoft.UUCP (Keith Shillington @prodigal) writes:
> Dale Worley at Cullinet Software writes:
> > Is the following program required to raise CONSTRAINT_ERROR (or whatever)?
> > 
> > procedure y is
> >   subtype x is range 0..100;
> >   a : x := 100;
> > begin
> >   a := a + 1;
> > end y;
> > 
> [keith replaces "subtype" with "type" so the code will compile.]
> 
> So, making that suggested modification results in correct compilation
> with the runtime result:
> 
> >>> Unhandled exception: CONSTRAINT_ERROR  (Range Check)
>     Raised in   Y.Y at line 5
> 
> So, yes, absolutely, constraint_error should be raised. [...]

But I am neither asking whether you thing that it should be raised,
nor whether your favorite implementation raises it, I am asking
whether the LRM *requires* that it be raised, or is an implementation
allowed to not raise it?

Sheesh!  Don't people understand what *standards* are?

Dale
-- 
Dale Worley		Cullinet Software
UUCP: ...!seismo!harvard!mit-eddie!cullvax!drw
ARPA: cullvax!drw@eddie.mit.edu
Un*x (a generic name for a class of OS's) != Unix (AT&T's brand of such)