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: brashear@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us (Philip Brashear)
Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry
Date: 1996/12/20
Message-ID: <59e39p$55u@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 205090677
references: <mazzanti-0512961053010001@131.114.200.115>
 <E2MvrB.Ip7@world.std.com> <32B8AF89.CA@lmtas.lmco.com>
 <E2o1M9.3AI@world.std.com>
organization: None
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-12-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


With regard to explicitly raising predefined exceptions:

I can't really imagine when this would be appropriate.  If I write code that
detects an exceptional situation, then I should send a message (to the caller,
which might be the outside world) that identifies that situation, not one that
can be lost in the myriad of causes for predefined exceptions.  Therefore (I
teach my Ada students and require of my programmers), if the programmer knows
of an exceptional situation, s/he should provide and raise an exception that
will be visible to the unit invoking his/her code.

Phil Brashear
CTA INCORPORATED
(University of Dayton, sometimes)