sswarts@bbn.com (Scott Swart) (07/04/90)
I feel a little stupid. I have been complaining for the last several months about the fact that Ada doesn't have a reraise for exceptions. Reading another post today, I noticed that "raise;" in an exception handler reraises the exception. OK, so I should have looked it up. But why reuse raise. For that matter, why reuse return, then, else, in and probably others. To me using the same keyword in different contexts is just confusing. My best guess is that there was a requirement for a maximum number of keywords so that the language would be "simple." Does anyone know the real explaination? Scott Swarts
stt@inmet.inmet.com (07/06/90)
Re: reuse of keywords There *is* a cost to adding reserved words. The ones I "run" into most often are "entry" and "select," where I am minding my own business writing a simple queueing package, or a simple menu package, and suddenly a bolt of lightning out of the tasking side of Ada hits me and my identifiers get declared RESERVED FOR MULTITASKING. In any case, what in one person's view is "inappropriate reuse" in another person's view is "appropriate overloading." "Raise;" seems like an appropriate overloading to me, but of course, I have read the "green book" so many times that I dream in Ada... :-} S. Tucker Taft Intermetrics, Inc. Cambridge, MA 02138