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,a3ca574fc2007430
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: Ada and Automotive Industry
Date: 1996/12/20
Message-ID: <dewar.851104397@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 205139463
references: <mazzanti-0512961053010001@131.114.200.115>
 <E2MvrB.Ip7@world.std.com> <32B8AF89.CA@lmtas.lmco.com>
 <E2o1M9.3AI@world.std.com> <59e39p$55u@ns1.sw-eng.falls-church.va.us>
organization: New York University
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1996-12-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Phil said

"I can't really imagine when this would be appropriate.  If I write code that
detects an exceptional situation, then I should send a message (to the caller,
which might be the outside world) that identifies that situation, not one that
can be lost in the myriad of causes for predefined exceptions.  Therefore (I
teach my Ada students and require of my programmers), if the programmer knows
of an exceptional situation, s/he should provide and raise an exception that
will be visible to the unit invoking his/her code."

Are you up to date on this thread, or reading behind? If the former, then
why do you not agree with my (to me) perfectly reasonable example of a case
when it would be appropriate to raise constraint error (division by zero
in a package for implementing saturated arithmetic).