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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d8a4797a79f9c90f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-30 12:50:18 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-xit-01!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "Randy Brukardt" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: I/O - exception handling Date: Fri, 30 May 2003 14:51:26 -0500 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <3ED4114A.5060204@spam.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3612.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3719.2500 X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38150 Date: 2003-05-30T14:51:26-05:00 List-Id: Preben Randhol wrote in message ... >No, so then why would an exception in Is_Open be expected at all? Are >there some perculiar hardware where you need to poke into the I/O to see >if a file was opened? It wouldn't be *expected*, but the standard *allows* it, so the truly paranoid programmer would have to take that into account. And even if you defined it not to raise any IO_Exceptions, it still could raise Storage_Error or Program_Error, so you can't claim that it never, ever raised any exceptions anyway. As I said, its not worth worrying about; in practice, it won't raise an exception, and there is no need to protect it. But you can't determine that from the standard (and there is no possible standard language from which you could). Randy.