From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: Exception handling overhead?
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 14:42:26 +0200
Date: 2009-04-24T14:42:26+02:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d9ugzcglzxp2$.1tkh5evojdali$.dlg@40tude.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 9faab480-850c-4ec5-b05e-8daec0301928@x5g2000yqk.googlegroups.com
On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 05:06:30 -0700 (PDT), Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> GNAT provides two exception handling mechanisms: zero-cost and setjump/
> longjump. "Zero-cost" really means zero _distributed_ cost, i.e. you
> incur a cost only when raising an exception, as you describe. The
> older setjump/longjump mechanism costs some execution time and memory
> whether you raise exceptions or not. It is possible to select either
> mechanism when compiling your program. For some details, see the short
> mailing list thread starting at [1].
>
> [1] http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2006-10/msg00270.html
>
> Of course, this is compiler-specific.
Plus, I guess that whatever distributed overhead exceptions might have, it
should be negligible comparing to the overhead of unbounded strings.
--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-24 12:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-24 11:52 Exception handling overhead? Peter C. Chapin
2009-04-24 12:06 ` Ludovic Brenta
2009-04-24 12:42 ` Dmitry A. Kazakov [this message]
2009-04-25 11:58 ` Peter C. Chapin
2009-04-24 14:06 ` anon
2009-04-24 15:48 ` Georg Bauhaus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox