This is funny, because a while ago (quite a while), people said that
this code:
if (intArray == null)
return intArray[3];
else
return -1;
was slower than this code:
try{
return intArray[3];
}
catch (NullPointerException e)
{
return -1
}
precisely because the JVM does the check for you anyway and the check
will be done twice (unless you have a JIT), especially if the condition
doesn't happen too often (there is still an overhead of generating the
exception -- which is quite large).
I guess times have changed :)
-rchit
Jim Kimball wrote:
>
> It was my understanding that code wrapped in an exception handler
> introduces more overhead to the JVM. I am sure I have seen articles on
> this exact topic in Java World or Java Report.
>
> Jim
>
> Dimitris Vyzovitis wrote:
> >
> > SHUDO Kazuyuki wrote:
> >
> > > > Personally I prefer explicit checks.
> > >
> > > Why?
> > >
> >
> > I am also tempted to ask why....
> > Is there any particular reason to add client side check for what the VM does on
> > its own?
> > I personally think that there is no need to do explicit checks in your code
> > (it is inherently suboptimal) and let the VM do its work - just add the
> > required exception handlers ;-}.
> >
> > -- dimitris
> >
>
> --
> =====================================================================
> Jim Kimball
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
