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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,d901a50a5adfec3c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,9f0bf354542633fd X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public From: robin_v@nospam.bigpond.com Subject: Re: Fortran or Ada? Date: 1998/10/01 Message-ID: <3612ca64.0@139.134.5.33>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 396520797 References: <36068E73.F0398C54@meca.polymtl.ca> <6u8r5o$aa4$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <360A3446.8AD84137@lmco.com> <6udre0$ha1$1@nnrp1.dejane <6utg60$h6l$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@telstra.net X-Trace: nsw.nnrp.telstra.net 907201320 139.134.5.33 (Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:22:00 EST) Organization: Telstra Big Pond Direct Reply-To: robin_v@nospam.bigpond.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 1998 10:22:00 EST Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-10-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In <6utg60$h6l$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, dewarr@my-dejanews.com writes: > >In article <19980929.214309.386@yktvmv.watson.ibm.com>, > jbs@yktvmv.watson.ibm.com wrote: >> The accident report indicates that they deliberately >> chose not to do it in this case because they were worried about >> performance. This would seem to indicate that turning off the >> error check is not cheap (in terms of performance). >> James B. Shearer >This is incomprehensible. Turning off a check eliminates the code for the >check and eliminates the performance penalty of the check. What are you >trying to say here? I think he's cracking a joke in the form of master of the understatement. By saying that ther error check is not cheap (in terms of performance), he's saying that it was a very expensive error. Posted from OS/2