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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 101deb,702e716e8c4544e8 X-Google-Attributes: gid101deb,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,53ce549c3b1907c1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-17 14:45:04 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.ems.psu.edu!news.litech.org!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!hub1.meganetnews.com!nntpserver.com!news-west.rr.com!news-east.rr.com!cyclone.nyroc.rr.com!cyclone-out.nyroc.rr.com!twister.nyroc.rr.com.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3E764F5F.4A025D83@yahoo.com> From: Peter Flass X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Ada Versus PL/I - The debate continues References: <3E73F755.79E9723B@adaworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:44:28 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.194.50.82 X-Complaints-To: abuse@rr.com X-Trace: twister.nyroc.rr.com 1047941068 24.194.50.82 (Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:44:28 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 17:44:28 EST Organization: Road Runner Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.pl1:4532 comp.lang.ada:35429 Date: 2003-03-17T22:44:28+00:00 List-Id: "John W. Kennedy" wrote: > > > Error recovery in Ada works quite well, thank you. > > Robin believes that it is a _good_ thing that PL/I allows the run-time > ON statement to alter the currently-assigned error recovery, and that > PL/I allows return to point of error, and will not be convinced that > both of these were excluded from Ada (and every other language I know of > with error handling) precisely because experience with PL/I was unfortunate. > I disagree vehemently. They were excluded because they were difficult to implement. Java (I believe) with its "try/catch" has effectively tried to re-introduce this. Any other type of error handling is deficient.