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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!seas.gwu.edu!mfeldman From: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Pre-condition vs. Post-condition Keywords: pre-condition, post-condition, exception Message-ID: <2907@sparko.gwu.edu> Date: 21 Mar 91 18:40:24 GMT References: <344@platypus.uofs.edu> <2865@sparko.gwu.edu> <97779@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <311@nic.cerf.net> <2891@sparko.gwu.edu> Reply-To: mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu () Organization: The George Washington University, Washington D.C. List-Id: In article 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