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=-0.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_20 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 23 Sep 93 14:28:42 GMT From: att!att-out!cbnewsl!willett@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (david.c.willett) Subject: Re: LRM 11.6 changing behavior (was: Bug in AdaEd???) Message-ID: List-Id: >>From article , by groleau@e7sa.crd.ge.com (Wes G roleau x1240 C73-8): > Give me a break! > > If I INTENDED to raise an exception, I would normally use a "raise" > statement. > > But it may not always be obvious to a programmer using objects > from another package or even someone else's work in the same unit, that > a particular statement will always raise a predefined statement. But > even if he/she KNEW it, it is not reasonable for a compiler to NOT raise > the exception. One of the many purposes of exceptions is to inform programme rs > that they did something they shouldn't have. Some people are now interpretin g > LRM 11.6 to mean "If you do write code that the compiler vendor thinks you > shouldn't, the compiler vendor has the right to pretend you didn't." > I normally try to avoid starting or encouraging flame wars, but I can't > resist saying, "I don't believe the LRM writers intended anything so stupid." > > Wes G. Consider that many documents, the US Constitution comes to mind, were interpreted by later "users" in ways their authors probably didn't imagine. I haven' been following this thread, so you may be absolutely right, but the idea of compiler writers "loosely" interpreting the LRM doesn't seem so far-fetched to me. After all, what do we pay AJPO for? :^).....It's a joke folks, I'm only kidding..... :^) <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dave Willett AT&T Federal Systems Advanced Technologies Remember Dave, you don't pay an anesthesiologist all that money to put you to sleep, you pay him to wake you up afterwards! -- from a discussion on the value of medical specialists