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,deeb88b0e7eede4f
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Help with Exceptions!
Date: 1996/05/16
Message-ID: <DrIMIC.1Cs@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 155197634
references: <4mmimq$s4r@hatathli.csulb.edu>
 <4nd7cm$fnp@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <DrGz6L.7LA@world.std.com>
 <JSA.96May16141119@organon.com>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-05-16T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <JSA.96May16141119@organon.com>,
Jon S Anthony <jsa@organon.com> wrote:
>One possible trick here would be to use Ada.Exceptions capabilities
>and attach information about the raising subprogram and such so that
>handlers could determine who,what,when,where,why sorts of things.
>Or do you have something more stringent in mind?

I had compile-time knowledge in mind.  Knowledge that could be used to
prove useful things about the program without running it, rather than
useful stuff that the handler can do at run time.

- Bob