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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,d2fe8ae54035f25f X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Received: by 10.180.79.228 with SMTP id m4mr8074440wix.7.1356778064558; Sat, 29 Dec 2012 02:47:44 -0800 (PST) Path: i11ni330125wiw.0!nntp.google.com!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.albasani.net!news.szaf.org!news.gnuher.de!news.enyo.de!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Florian Weimer Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: A couple of quick questions Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2012 11:47:44 +0100 Message-ID: <87zk0xkucv.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> References: <195201b7-c447-4580-aeb4-1c2329ee45e0@googlegroups.com> <0387724a-7fd2-4317-ba16-d3322dd0fdec@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: news.enyo.de 1356778063 8585 172.17.135.6 (29 Dec 2012 10:47:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@enyo.de Cancel-Lock: sha1:4mIU/4NdyXU+namq+pBUHxisQ8k= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: 2012-12-29T11:47:44+01:00 List-Id: * Dufr: > Is the efficiency of the compiled code by penalized in any way by > the putative bloat of the language? Yes, for some features. Exception handling tables increase the size of the program even if they are not used because no exceptions are thrown. Run-time checks (such as overflow checks and array bounds checks) are typically bloat which increases instruction cache pressure and decreases effective execution speed. Code for abort deferral is automatically inserted by the compiler and slows down the program, even if no asynchronous transfer of control ever occurs. Proper compiler flags can eliminate these overheads, in some cases without any ill effects or observable differences in behavior (not so for array bounds checks, obviously).