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!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.fsmpi.rwth-aachen.de!reality.xs3.de!news.jacob-sparre.dk!loke.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: 'raise' in aspects?
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 00:16:43 -0500
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <m2i03s$l1e$1@loke.gir.dk>
References: <85siilc88t.fsf@stephe-leake.org><85h9ywasfq.fsf@stephe-leake.org>
 <m2c080$gb0$1@loke.gir.dk> <lyy4s67x3m.fsf@pushface.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24-196-82-226.static.mdsn.wi.charter.com
X-Trace: loke.gir.dk 1414300604 21550 24.196.82.226 (26 Oct 2014 05:16:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 05:16:44 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:22741
Date: 2014-10-26T00:16:43-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Simon Wright" <simon@pushface.org> wrote in message 
news:lyy4s67x3m.fsf@pushface.org...
> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> writes:
>
>> You can write
>>     raise Program_Error with "Not yet implemented";
>> in any function (since a raise expression matches any type), and you 
>> don't
>> have to dream up a useless dummy return value to do so.
>
> actually
>
>   return raise Program_Error with "Not yet implemented";
>
> of course.

Right.

> I liked (but haven't had reason to try; I had already spent far too long
> generating "useless dummy return values") Bob Duff's recursive solution:
>
>   function F return Boolean is
>   begin
>      raise Program_Error with "Not yet implemented";
>      return F;
>   end F;

I think that one is a compiler-fall-over test, at least if the return type 
is a limited and required build-in-place. :-) Not so much for Boolean (but 
of course "return False" works fine there).

                              Randy.