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: 103376,52fd60a337c05842 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-15 20:19:09 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!intgwpad.nntp.telstra.net!news.telstra.net!news-server.bigpond.net.au!not-for-mail From: Dale Stanbrough Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: ada paper critic References: <3D095F70.8090001@telepath.com> <3D0A3B59.4A4B9E04@acm.org> <3D0BF0B0.44394459@acm.org> User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.2 (PPC Mac OS X) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 03:19:07 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 144.132.91.90 X-Complaints-To: news@bigpond.net.au X-Trace: news-server.bigpond.net.au 1024197547 144.132.91.90 (Sun, 16 Jun 2002 13:19:07 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 13:19:07 EST Organization: BigPond Internet Services (http://www.bigpond.net.au) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26062 Date: 2002-06-16T03:19:07+00:00 List-Id: Jeffrey Carter wrote: > > However, this is irrelevant to the original post to which I was > replying. It claimed that the use of String to attach information to an > exception made exceptions in Ada inherently slow. I didn't say it made the language inherently slow. I said that it made it more difficult to program some things in Ada. It could also make it slower, however. > Again, this was in the context of exceptions impacting execution speed, > not of errors. Your reply was... > This seems to be an incomplete sentence. If I interpret it correctly, > the Ada intent is that the information be carried primarily by the > exception name. You should not be using a single exception and > differentiating between logical exceptions by the information attached > to that exception. > Also, exceptions should only be used for exceptional situations, so this > does not impact normal processing at all. I didn't notice anything in your reply that mentioned execution speed. My (malformed) comment was... ...and doesn't the fact that the only way to attach information to an exception is via a string, requiring conversions to/from the appropriate format just to find out what -really- went wrong? which doesn't mention anything about speed. The real problem is in determining what type the object is. If you want to retain type information in a string, you'll have some problems. An alternative is to have a hierachy of types (type Exceptions is tagged...), and simply encode a pointer to the appropriate object as a string. This is redoing what Java does (and my guess is that that's how JGnat does it too). Dale