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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,61e9062c1f23b9d5
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news3.google.com!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder2-2.proxad.net!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool3.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: contracted exceptions
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1181165630.012508.55290@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
 <19fxsxv1god43$.1pqq8vgfu2itn$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <ud507n1rt.fsf_-_@STRIPCAPStelus.net> <wccwsyfa5vf.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <f4ae75$jtp$1@jacob-sparre.dk> <gwqsi47pdu2j.89sc0pb9332p$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <uzm3aq130.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net> <s2uary9xul2i.bsehe8l9otx3.dlg@40tude.net>
 <usl92wdyj.fsf@STRIPCAPStelus.net>
 <cdcp1ydis4o7$.185z3b5nusall$.dlg@40tude.net> <m2k5ue8dhk.fsf@mac.com>
 <1it2vtizha2fi$.jxnoaxmm9sop$.dlg@40tude.net> <m27iqd8g04.fsf@mac.com>
 <12vqux55uf5rn.1u5enj1mh0ubk$.dlg@40tude.net> <m23b1096w7.fsf@mac.com>
 <kyiyvo7rv97m$.vy3bfrwvqfem$.dlg@40tude.net> <m2y7is6nc5.fsf@mac.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:20:19 +0200
Message-ID: <lmg98mzw0o50.1txm4j8o5ek2s$.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 10 Jun 2007 17:19:58 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 972d2efc.newsspool3.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=Z0Z[GE[cgJQV0Pe9PRnbJ\McF=Q^Z^V3X4Fo<]lROoRQFl8W>\BH3YR\@63>n8SU:TDNcfSJ;bb[UIRnRBaCd<M^?ndP?GLeX3R?CG@?Fg8c2\
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16146
Date: 2007-06-10T17:19:58+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:49:46 +0100, Simon Wright wrote:

> "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> 
>> On Sat, 09 Jun 2007 22:04:24 +0100, Simon Wright wrote:
> 
>>> Also, this check is about a precondition, if the caller violates
>>> the precondition she has no right to expect me not to raise
>>> unheralded exceptions!
>>
>> Oh my. "If you don't do that, then I ..." (:-))
>>
>> No, if the precondition was violated by the caller, then how this
>> caller is supposed to handle the exception it does not know? And why
>> would you rely on this handling, provided that it is exactly one who
>> first violated the contract?
> 
> How is the callee supposed to handle the contract violation? The whole
> program is unsafe.

Right, this is why continuation in any form, including raising exceptions,
is unsafe. There must be an independent program [a judge] to handle the
case.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de