>
>
> On Fri, 12 Sep 1997, Manong Dibos wrote:
> >
> > Perhaps if C had good exception handling throw(), try{}, catch(){}, all
> > this farting around with if()'s could be made a lot more streamlined...
> > Just throw an exception at the first hint of a deviation from the "norm".
>
> Sure. We'd also be about 500 times slower.
>
> Exception handling is _complex_. That translates into slow.
I dunno - implementing it with setjmp/longjmp seems pretty fast to me :)
[but what do I know] - FWIW - Watcom C++ 10.0+ has really fast exceptions
(don't have speed impact - suspect they do far jumps)
Slow? Unless GCC uses same methods as Borland/Microsoft it shouldn't be
slow.... "if [cond] (set value; jump)" ~= "if [cond] return <value>"
The 'catch' I suppose might be complicated though.
[I could post my scheme and see what people think... it's entirely
userspace though... and not thoroughly tested <yet>]
> There's nothing wrong with "goto"s, especially for handling "error" cases
> (ie anything that throws us out of the normal flow of control). Using an
> explicit goto is often clearer than trying to hide things behind "pretty"
> constructs, and it's almost always a lot faster.
I agree - with setjmp/longjmp to handle 'gotos' beyond the local function
area... is there a more efficient way?
[working on a new binary format (for almost a year now)... object-based
but trying to be as fast as possible because it has to support RT VR-system]
> Linus "Pascal and Ada considered harmful" Torvalds
<grin> - Agreed. I lumped C++ here too until I discovered GNU C++ :)
G'day, eh?
- Teunis