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: 103376,999932ecc319322a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsread.com!newsprint.newsread.com!in.100proofnews.com!in.100proofnews.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!newsfeed-00.mathworks.com!nntp.TheWorld.com!not-for-mail
From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: advice on package design
Date: 21 Mar 2005 11:19:55 -0500
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Message-ID: <wcc8y4heztg.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
References: <1110212638.336123.298580@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
 <1gbk0qx2sgzpg$.sltzfssofla8$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wcc64zw63j6.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <3jok3ghqqls8$.1rrsonb8jsurt$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccsm30ttj5.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <88zllqj1min5$.fqqxis9i327d$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wcck6o7s4q4.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <18e9a92kz25wu$.8b965bel5vef$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wccpsxy1i8l.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com>
 <1dgodaruwhhwo$.1baazg490isjx.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wcc7jk6rsvg.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <d1cms8$knl$1@titan.btinternet.com>
 <wccwts66lh4.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com> <423a9fc2$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: pcls4.std.com 1111421995 7937 192.74.137.71 (21 Mar 2005 16:19:55
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:19:55 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:9680
Date: 2005-03-21T11:19:55-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Martin Dowie" <martin.dowie@baesystems.com> writes:

> Robert A Duff wrote:
> >> I've never understood why this needs to be this way...
> >
> > Because I2 is visible in the handler.  But it's declaration is never
> > successfully elaborated, so it does not exist!
> >
> > procedure P is
> >     X: Integer := F(...); -- raises Some_Error
> >     Y: Integer := 123;
> > begin
> >     ...
> > exception
> >     when Some_Error =>
> >         Put(X); Put(Y); -- What are the values of X and Y here?
> > end P;
> 
> And we couldn't have come up with some form of words to get
> round that?!?!?!?! :-)

It's not a wording issue.  It just doesn't make any sense to allow code
to refer to variables that do not exist.

What's needed is a syntax that better reflects the semantics.
It was a mistake in Ada 83 to attach handlers to scope-y things.

- Bob