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,b69d2b87c02b5151
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: arnold@nospam.com (Stephen Arnold)
Subject: Re: Numerical exceptions not raised properly?
Date: 1999/11/04
Message-ID: <7vtagn$ikp@chronicle.concentric.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 544623719
References: <7vkgnl$u5@chronicle.concentric.net> <7vmkae$p4s$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
Organization: ENSCO Inc.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-11-04T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <7vmkae$p4s$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Robert Dewar <dewar@gnat.com> 
wrote:

>In article <7vkgnl$u5@chronicle.concentric.net>,
>  arnold@nospam.com (Stephen Arnold) wrote:
>> Howdy folks:
>>
>> I'm pretty new to Ada, as well as GNAT, so this could be due
>to my own
>> ignorance (rather than a GNAT problem), but it seems that
>certain
>> exceptions are not being raised properly.
>
>
>This actually functions as an interesting test as to whether
>users have accessed the deeply hidden secret archives before
>trying to use GNAT, namely the GNAT documentation included
>in every GNAT distribution in plain sight.

I've already been summarily flogged twice on this one; thanks for the 
third flogging 8-O

It's not just PowerPoint (or M$ software), but all GUI stuff should be 
reasonably intuitive.  However, in this case I shouldn't expect it; this 
is my first experience with anything as cool as Ada (this approach 
seemed to work fine with straight gcc in my C class...)

I will research first before I yell for help next time (I *did* ask my 
local guru first, but he couldn't answer so I turned to the list).

Steve