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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: 
 eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Intervention needed?
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2019 16:07:45 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <lyo95l4xmm.fsf@pushface.org>
References: <b196da6e-4614-42f9-9147-b1708c6e5094@googlegroups.com>
	<c16f6c7d-34d9-4d7e-96e6-9c00e387b2a9@googlegroups.com>
	<q66m95$8ri$1@dont-email.me>
	<a534f338-a418-424e-8043-31c738682807@googlegroups.com>
	<q68mv0$rea$1@dont-email.me>
	<a4ab4f3c-9151-47c7-9d3f-f6a23451fa0e@googlegroups.com>
	<bba8f6a8-36ce-4bed-bd84-8a9ea7dc02f7@googlegroups.com>
	<q699nu$ban$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
	<87wokhk289.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<q7m5f7$o1k$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
	<87va01gv3t.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<q7tvrn$oci$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk> <lywokdfk5q.fsf@pushface.org>
	<q80lou$sdn$1@franka.jacob-sparre.dk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="51b0ed423ef8cff9bbe5d8f37963298d";
	logging-data="30250"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/S07aGLNpYeb3EamsauqqbAqzknPPuV6E="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (darwin)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:9zRnRCTtG0/sdsk+rdZSZOVl6YM=
	sha1:nANQiVYhF2P1Ma9+6/GD8vmWoJI=
Xref: reader01.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:56076
Date: 2019-04-04T16:07:45+01:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:

> "Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message 
> news:lywokdfk5q.fsf@pushface.org...
>> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:
>>
>>> The only way to make such a check that wouldn't trigger all of the
>>> time would require looking at both the body and the call at the same
>>> time -- a complete abandonment of privacy and separation of
>>> concerns.
>>
>> But it would be the compiler looking, not me.
>
> Doesn't matter. One can't depend on the contract of a subprogram if
> some calls are going to be illegal/raise P_E because of the contents
> of the body.

Sorry: I was confusing 'private' and privacy