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: 103376,790d824907970cc3 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robert Dewar Subject: Re: Exception Propagation Date: 1999/06/08 Message-ID: <7jk1c1$t8$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 487198904 References: <7jh857$ej$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <375CC549.7EDFB885@spam.com> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x31.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 205.232.38.14 Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Jun 08 21:19:07 1999 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.04 [en] (OS/2; I) Date: 1999-06-08T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <375CC549.7EDFB885@spam.com>, spamwithchipsplease@spam.com wrote: > This feature has escaped me, or I have forgot ( RM95 11.4(4) > ), I've > also checked RM83 and found it to be a feature of that > language edition. > I would rather the exception was propogated aleast this gives > the option > of deciding whether the program terminates or not. Propagated to where? There really is no possibility of propagation (you certainly do not want to introduce asynchronous exceptions for this purpose!) I would have preferred that an unhandled exception in a task caused termination of the entire program, you can always get the bizarre effect in the RM if you really want it by doing: exception when others => null; at the outer level of a task > Given the RM specification, I think a mandatory "when others" > task level exception handler would be prudent. Check your compiler, it may have an option for handling this error situation nicely. But in general, yes, that's a good idea (mandatory when others at the top level of a task). Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't.