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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,TO_NO_BRKTS_FROM_MSSP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac55ec18f7b0a53c X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-06-04 14:18:54 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!news2.aha.ru!mtu.ru!news-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator!feed2.newsfeeds.com!newsfeeds.com!newsranger.com!www.newsranger.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada From: Ted Dennison References: <9fgq5t$hok$1@news.huji.ac.il> Subject: Re: Ada and embedded applications Message-ID: X-Abuse-Info: When contacting newsranger.com regarding abuse please X-Abuse-Info: forward the entire news article including headers or X-Abuse-Info: else we will not be able to process your request X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsranger.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 17:18:09 EDT Organization: http://www.newsranger.com Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 21:18:09 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:8095 Date: 2001-06-04T21:18:09+00:00 List-Id: In article <9fgq5t$hok$1@news.huji.ac.il>, Ehud Lamm says... > >Larry Kilgallen wrote in message >> Efficiency of exception handling obviously varies among implementations, >> but I worry about any design that is going to encounter so many exceptions >> that their performance becomes relevant. > >Perhaps one should note that there can be implementations in which exception >handling support causes overhead even for programs and routines that don't >raise or handle exceptions. If your definition of "overhead" includes the executable's memory footprint, I think all programs would qualify. --- T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com