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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: ffc1e,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidffc1e,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,5da92b52f6784b63 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,a48e5b99425d742a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Robin Rosenberg Subject: Re: Papers on the Ariane-5 crash and Design by Contract Date: 1997/04/03 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 230454691 Sender: roro@funsys References: <01bc3603$f9373d40$b280400a@gavinspc> Organization: Enator Objective Management AB Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.programming.threads,comp.software-eng Date: 1997-04-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: "Gavin Collings" writes: [...] > Good. The main point about the Java model, though, is that the compiler > checks that the programmer has at least thought about handling all > exceptions that may be generated in nested calls. This means that the > programmer HAS to think about dealing with error conditions. So, in the > Ariane case, if the precondition existed (as some say it did) the compiler > would have given warnings to the effect that it IF the error occurred, it > would NOT have been handled. Wouldn't this have made the disaster less > likely? In this paricular case: No. A special case in Java is the exception class RunTimeException which you don't have to handle or declare. > Gavin. -- Robin Rosenberg, | Voice: +46-8-7036200 | "Any opinions are my own, etc. etc." Enator Objective | Fax: (+46-8-7036283)| Management AB | Mail: rrg@funsys.se |