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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,86c750b8474bf6d5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news2.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool1.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: About String
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <g2bs6b$h2m$1@registered.motzarella.org> <m2od6d5id7.fsf@mac.com>
 <484ABED3.8040909@obry.net> <UJD2k.71707$%B6.16259@newsfe13.ams2>
 <484b802a$0$23844$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi>
 <x26ph24q0srg.yccve8hoi66z$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <484bbea5$0$2673$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi>
 <1w1h9fk6fsahj$.dd2q4gcgx9re$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <484c13d6$0$2671$4f793bc4@news.tdc.fi>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:26:26 +0200
Message-ID: <10zgnb1oefyd1$.1u1lndhbz5l1q.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 09 Jun 2008 09:26:24 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 08386668.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=iaR2GJE^b=285[]]\]T081ic==]BZ:af>4Fo<]lROoR1<`=YMgDjhg2CK5bF[H?U\3[6LHn;2LCV>7enW;^6ZC`4IXm65S@:3>?T\m22O:e0Q=
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:625
Date: 2008-06-09T09:26:24+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 20:17:33 +0300, Niklas Holsti wrote:

> I agree that exception contracts would work in this example. Ok, 
> exception contracts would reveal some -- perhaps most -- of these 
> errors at compile time, but not all.

Nothing can reveal all errors.

But errors in exceptions became painful in Ada. I permanently run into the
stuff, like when an unhandled exception winds up controlled objects,
causing secondary exceptions in Finalizes (which may not happen if the
primary exception were handled). It is very difficult to trace back.

[...]
> I agree that an application could not *recover* from failures in 
> package elaboration. But the application could possibly fail more 
> gracefully, perhaps even continue operating in a degraded mode.

I think that partitions could be a better candidate for such things.

Maybe it is a "philosophy" again, but to me failed declarations is a
correctness problem, rather than an exceptional state. As such it should
not be handled inside itself.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de