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-Thread: 103376,699cc914522aa7c4
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!130.59.10.21.MISMATCH!kanaga.switch.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!switch.ch!news.ip-plus.net!newsfeed.ip-plus.net!news.post.ch!not-for-mail
From: Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Structured exception information (task, ANEX E)
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 08:17:53 +0100
Organization: Swisscom IP+ (post doesn't reflect views of Swisscom)
Message-ID: <45b46521$1@news.post.ch>
References: <eog0g5$2bn$1@cernne03.cern.ch> <45acd36e$1@news.post.ch>
 <wcck5zjm2f6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.41.146.1
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: atlas.ip-plus.net 1169450277 17379 194.41.146.1 (22 Jan 2007 07:17:57
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@ip-plus.net
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:17:57 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025)
In-Reply-To: <wcck5zjm2f6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: w01iwt.pnet.ch
X-Original-Trace: 22 Jan 2007 08:17:53 +0200, w01iwt.pnet.ch
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8390
Date: 2007-01-22T08:17:53+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Robert A Duff schrieb:
> Martin Krischik <krischik@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> 
>> Maciej Sobczak schrieb:
>>
>>> Yes, I'm asking for "throwing objects", in the C++ parlance.
>>> How to do this in Ada?
>>> If I cannot - how to solve this design problem?
>> I believe this was skipped in Ada because of ANEX E and task types.
> 
> I don't see any problems there.
> 
>> ...You
>> must understand that Ada exceptions quite often propagated across thread
>> borders and sometimes - if ANEX E is implemented - over a network
>> connections to another computer.
>>
>> I do not say this is impossible but it could be quite expensive
>> performance wise.
> 
> Efficiency is irrelevant to language design.  You should never leave a
> feature out merely because it's slow.  What matters is distributed
> overhead, and I see none here.  Yes, if an exception propagates across a
> network, you have to ship all the data across the network.  The
> programmer controls how much data that is, so it's not a problem.
> Besides, shipping a String is no more efficient than shipping properly
> typed data.

Realy? How about access types? C++ allows access types inside exceptions.

> Many other languages have solved this problem (even in the presence of
> threads and distributed systems).

A Weblogic Server just converts the exception into ...UserException or 
...SystemException and then adds the old exception name as string. Any 
"structured exception information" beeing stripped before propagation.

What a great solution.

> The 200-character limit was a mistake, by the way.  It was based on
> fictitious implementation difficulties.  Ada already has functions
> that return results whose size is not known at the call site (e.g.
> "return String").  The same memory-management techniques would apply to
> arbitrary-sized exception occurrences.

And it is optional - a implementation is free to do it better.

Martin