Re: Pre-condition vs. Post-condition

[mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman)]

In article <jls.669524498@rutabaga> jls@rutabaga.Rational.COM (Jim Showalter) writes:
>>Some bit-fiddlers have argued that the latter is slightly more efficient,
>
>BIT FIDDLER!?!?!? BIT FIDDLER!?!?!?!?
>
>Stab me in the heart and TWIST THE KNIFE, why don't you?

Well, OK, you're not a bit fiddler. It's just that in discussing design-
oriented questions like pre- and post- conditions, appropriate design 
with exceptions, and the like, too many folks STILL jump too quickly into
micro-efficiency matters and questions of how compilers implement exceptions.
This gives me a sense of deja-vu from the early days of structured
programming etc., when people argued that go-to's were faster
than loops and procedures, and self-modifying code was even faster than that.
So what? We all know that computers and compilers both get faster over time.

Actually, I wrote the "bit fiddler" comment even before I read your note,
which was several notes later in my news reader. I chuckled when I read
your note, because I knew SOMEONE would raise the issue.

Performance issues are NOT unimportant - even this fuzzyheaded professor
would agree with that - but I think discussions of marginal gains or losses
in efficiency, traded off against more important design matters, just
muddy the waters. 

Sorry, Jim .. I didn't even know your note was out there...nothing personal.

Mike