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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,a3ca574fc2007430
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Ted Dennison <dennison@escmail.orl.lmco.com>
Subject: When to raise predefined exceptions (was: Ada and the Automotive
 Industry)
Date: 1996/12/20
Message-ID: <32BA9772.2781E494@escmail.orl.lmco.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 205094426
references: <mazzanti-0512961053010001@131.114.200.115>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Lockheed Martin Information Systems
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3_U1 sun4m)
Date: 1996-12-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert I. Eachus wrote:
> 
>    So my rule on explicitly raising predefined exceptions is that I
> will raise them either if the meaning is the predefined meaning of
> that exception, or if suppression of a language defined check, either
> explicitly or through 11.6, will potentially suppress the exception.

I guess that is what I was getting at. There have been times where I
wanted to consider certian values out of range for a type, but the only
way to do it was to explicitly check for those values. It seemed
pointless to create a new exception to raise, when any reasonable
handler for this situation would just have to handle *both*
Constraint_Error and my new exception.

-- 
T.E.D.          
             |  Work - mailto:dennison@escmail.orl.lmco.com  |
             |  Home - mailto:dennison@iag.net               |
             |  URL  - http://www.iag.net/~dennison          |