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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e4bb63e08046e1a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-10-25 13:41:19 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newsfeed.news2me.com!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!hub1.meganetnews.com!nntpserver.com!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!not-for-mail From: Dale Stanbrough Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: is exception when others => null; smart? References: User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.3b1 (PPC Mac OS X) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 20:41:18 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.132.47.50 X-Complaints-To: news@bigpond.net.au X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1035578478 144.132.47.50 (Sat, 26 Oct 2002 06:41:18 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 06:41:18 EST Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:30141 Date: 2002-10-25T20:41:18+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > Finalization can also be used for this purpose, and that's a cleaner way > to do it, but finalization is *very* expensive in most Ada compilers, > whereas the above "when others" is pretty cheap. Are the same costs associated with C++ destructors, or is there something peculiar to Ada that causes it to be so expensive? Dale