From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on
	ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 22 Sep 93 11:45:52 GMT
From: news.crd.ge.com!e7sa!groleau@uunet.uu.net  (Wes Groleau x1240 C73-8)
Subject: Re: Bug in AdaEd???
Message-ID: <CDr7CH.C9x@crdnns.crd.ge.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

>>      Now if you read RM 11.6(7), compilers are not only allowed, but
>> encouraged to remove predefined operations whose only possible effect
>> is to raise an exception.  "A predefined operation need not be invoked
>> at all, if its only possible effect is to propagate a predefined
>> exception." (RM 11.6)  So not raising CONSTRAINT_ERROR is appropriate.
>
>One more question on RM 11.6(7): isn't it supposed to be saying that the
>operation need not be invoked (because we know the operation will result
>in an exception), but that the exception should still be raised (ie, the
>statement may be replaced by an explicit "raise" statement)?

Language lawyers please explain in short words if I'm wrong, but I can't 
for the life of me think of ANY reason why optimization of code with
predetermined results would intentionally be done to give different results!