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,fc050a66c3b5d87d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,86e8c626be2471ae X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public From: "James Giles" Subject: Re: F9X twister & ADA (was: n-dim'l vectors) Date: 2000/04/12 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 609960738 References: <8cctts$ujr$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <38EA0440.1ECBC158@ncep.noaa.gov> <38ED4ECA.ADB698C9@sdynamix.com> <38F28A85.53809F39@sdynamix.com> <38F2C1DC.5538F9F0@research.canon.com.au> <5jJI4.297$PV.9915@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> <38F3D1D3.416B3493@research.canon.com.au> <85SI4.4008$fV.338113@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> <38F3F803.A4A56259@research.canon.com.au> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3612.1700 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 955515313 12.74.2.106 (Wed, 12 Apr 2000 04:55:13 GMT) Organization: AT&T Worldnet NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 04:55:13 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-04-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Geoff Bull wrote in message <38F3F803.A4A56259@research.canon.com.au>... ... >Actually, in my case the point of flushing files is to *not* throw away >the evidence of where the program was up to when it crashed. There's a difference between flushing files (which I didn't even mention) and closing them (which loses file position information and, on UNIX, may actually destroy temporary files). And, branching to a handler probably loses all of the register contents that were present when the error arose. I still prefer to quit *immediately*. The buffers are inside the system and not part of my process image anyway. There should be no way to quit, suspend, or even pause a process which doesn't flush them (the system will need the space for other processes anyway). Systems which throw away I/O buffer information when a process terminates are seriously broken. ... >Going back to your earlier example, if you decided to raise >an exception in Z and you really did want to handle it in A >(because of requirement of graceful operation for naive users), >you would have to go back and modify procedures B .. Y to >either handle or pass on the exception. Or, you'd have to express the desire to "gracefully" terminate in a way that doesn't involve exceptions. Like the possibility of sending yourself a KILL signal. Now, you're not pretending to be *handling* an error (which implies the possibility of recovery), you're just quitting. -- J. Giles