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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e4bb63e08046e1a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-24 09:39:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!wn13feed!wn11feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi.com!rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3DB8204B.2080804@attbi.com> From: Mark Biggar User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win 9x 4.90; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020530 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: is exception when others => null; smart? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.235.91.30 X-Complaints-To: abuse@attbi.com X-Trace: rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.net 1035477545 12.235.91.30 (Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:39:05 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:39:05 GMT Organization: AT&T Broadband Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 16:39:06 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30106 Date: 2002-10-24T16:39:06+00:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote: > Hi > > As Emacs (ugg!) got installed when I had to reinstall Debian due to a > hard disc crash, I thought I'd have a look at the ada-mode before > uninstalling Emacs. > > Now I'm in the process of making a ada-mode for vim (currently called: > am - Ada in the Morning) which will have much of the functionality of > the ada-mode for Emacs. > > However there is one thing with ada-mode which I don't know is what I > want: > > If you choose to generate a body for a procedure or a function then you > get this: > > procedue Proc > is > > begin > > exception > when others => null; > end Proc; > > My question is: Is this smart? I mean won't you then automatically mask > all the potential problems you might get at run-time so that you won't > see errors in the code during testing? I can see that it might also have > advantages, but before I implement this I would like to hear what you > think. Probably not. If you want the opposite policy change it to: when others => raise; BTW, make it an optional feature which way you want it. -- Mark Biggar mark.a.biggar@attbi.com