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,a5170f42aaba5839
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: GNAT DOS vs. GNAT NT: Pragma Suppress?
Date: 1997/03/22
Message-ID: <dewar.859041801@merv>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 227543142
References: <33313F49.640E@cci.de>
Organization: New York University
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


<<Is this deliberately different in the NT version, or should we maybe
file a bug report..? Could other people try this with the Windows NT
version of GNAT 3.09? In case it matters this was on a P120, running
the German Windows NT 4.00.1381>>

Don't file a bug report, there is no bug here. You wrote an erroneous
program (a program that violates a check that is suppressed is
erroneous). Erroneous programs can do anything they like, including
raise the exception anyway.

This demonstration program does not really demonstrate anything. If you
ran it and it deleted your system disk, you would no doubt be surprised,
but it still would not be a bug!

And no, there is no reason to expect erroneous programs to behave
the same on different versions of GNAT, or even on the same version
of GNAT from day to day.