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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wiley!spp2!minotaur!simpson
From: simpson@minotaur.uucp (Scott Simpson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Two questions
Message-ID: <1710@spp2.UUCP>
Date: 31 Mar 89 18:59:45 GMT
References: <674@uva.UUCP>
Sender: news@spp2.UUCP
Reply-To: simpson@minotaur.UUCP (Scott Simpson)
Organization: TRW Arcadia Project
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <674@uva.UUCP> hm@uva.UUCP (Hans Mulder & Sjouke Mauw) writes:
>We are trying to understand Ada tasking and there are two things we fail to
>understand:
>
>1. When an exception is raised and not handled in a task body, the task
>   is terminated and the exception is not further propagated, without
>   notice (11.4.1.8).  Why is this?
>   Is there a way to invoke the kind of traceback that occurs when an
>   exception is propagated out of the main program?

>From the Rationale (Section 14.4, page 325)

"Note that if the exception where propagated to the parent task, it would
mean that the child tasks could interfere asynchronously wihth their parent,
and it would also mean that these interferences could occur simultaneously,
with disastrous results."

I think asynchronous is the key word.
	Scott Simpson
	TRW Space and Defense Sector
	oberon!trwarcadia!simpson  		(UUCP)
	trwarcadia!simpson@oberon.usc.edu	(Internet)