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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Received: by 10.180.85.134 with SMTP id h6mr8958194wiz.0.1378961198533;
 Wed, 11 Sep 2013 21:46:38 -0700 (PDT)
Path: 
 border1.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca3.giganews.com!border4.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!gn7no7660407wib.1!news-out.google.com!v3ni93009wiv.1!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Natasha Kerensikova <lithiumcat@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Reference counting and idempotent finalize
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 04:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <slrnl32hou.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
References: <slrnl30ie3.1lme.lithiumcat@sigil.instinctive.eu>
 <l0pn8q$rih$1@adenine.netfront.net> <ly38pb6s8u.fsf@pushface.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Injection-Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 04:46:38 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="31d6bde745a337034b005384ef225743";
 logging-data="25524"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
 posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+UrhWTIPe1/nloQv2MKjCb"
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.9p1 (FreeBSD)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:7418GN7cQWjONvgUO5yZcJ0+zUg=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Original-Bytes: 2052
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com comp.lang.ada:183339
Date: 2013-09-12T04:46:38+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 2013-09-11, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org> wrote:
> "Jeffrey R. Carter" <spam.jrcarter.not@spam.acm.org> writes:
>
>> ARM 7.6.1 says, "It is a bounded error for a call on Finalize or
>> Adjust that occurs as part of object finalization or assignment to
>> propagate an exception." My practice has, therefore, been to always
>> ensure that Finalize cannot propagate an exception.
>
> If one of my programs were to raise an exception in Finalize it would be
> because I hadn't understood the problem - or because Storage_Error - and
> in either case it wouldn't be safe to continue.

That's roughly the reasoning I had put behind the words "the world ends"
in the OP.