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: 103376,743cbb1eadac54f3
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: question on exceptions
Date: 1996/11/08
Message-ID: <E0J5x6.7HA@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 195198663
references: <E0GJHH.5Jy@world.std.com> <E0I7zK.E4x.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-11-08T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <E0I7zK.E4x.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>,
Tucker Taft <stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com> wrote:
>In an exception handler, membership tests could be used to determine 
>what sort of additional information was passed along.

Yeah, I also envisioned such implementation-defined stuff.

But I want to declare the type of the attached information at the point
of the exception declaration, so that *handlers* can know for sure (at
compile time) that every *raise* of, say, The_Sky_Is_Falling will attach
(say) the current color of the sky.

The membership test isn't so awful, with appropriate comments at the
point of the exception declaration, but it *could* be done at compile
time.

- Bob