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=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,ea5071f634c2ea8b X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Received: by 10.68.35.131 with SMTP id h3mr3601349pbj.1.1322040741069; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 01:32:21 -0800 (PST) Path: lh20ni8511pbb.0!nntp.google.com!news1.google.com!goblin2!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Simon Wright Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Generic-Package Elaboration Question / Possible GNAT Bug. Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:32:20 +0000 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <7bf9bc32-850a-40c6-9ae2-5254fe220533@f29g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <4295dc09-43de-4557-a095-fc108359f27f@y42g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> <3snehoqgs8ia$.1nobjem6g6hx6$.dlg@40tude.net> <128rdz2581345$.c4td19l7qp9z$.dlg@40tude.net> <16ipwvpdavifr$.17bxf7if7f6kh$.dlg@40tude.net> <4ecb78b1$0$6643$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <1iofgbqznsviu$.phvidtvxlyj4$.dlg@40tude.net> <4ecbb96e$0$6581$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net> <4ecbdfdb$0$6629$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net> <12hfiflyf7pr5$.l3pkpgoid8xt$.dlg@40tude.net> <1ecuhb030iugz.4q1hfjx371xa.dlg@40tude.net> <4ecc393d$0$7625$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <124aq618dmove.884jj64mzm6w$.dlg@40tude.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="dFCm8HWntFqmDIilBLqEJQ"; logging-data="22495"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/AruXcP5qzBFA4q+4Gkwd9jpEHXgybuQs=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (darwin) Cancel-Lock: sha1:4Ip7K4b+0zapTKZycUoaHhSHz5w= sha1:cspS3LydB0YKZoUSjD0ioFV4n3g= Xref: news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:19068 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: 2011-11-23T09:32:20+00:00 List-Id: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" writes: > It is lousy language design placing implementation (executable code > ensuring the desired behavior, e.g. raising exception) into > declarations. Are you just talking about [post]conditions? because it's not uncommon to use complex declarative regions for run-time array bounds etc, which will include the possibility of exceptions. [Does SPARK forbid such declarative constructs?]