You probably made my day. I'll test and report later. On 21 nov, 03:01, John Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 3:49 PM, segoe <[email protected]> wrote: > > My experience is that exceptions kill performance from the point > > the first exception is raised, and it is really noticeable. In my > > language > > (ast interpreter, lisp-like), i've tried to add a debugger with stack > > traces/restarts based > > on exceptions. > > If you are using exceptions as restarts, then you should override > fillInStackTrace() in those classes to do nothing. That's the real > time-killer. > > > > > > > Things went like this: (server VM) > > (fib 30) > > > naive, no exceptions: 0.484 msec > > exceptions catched, but none thrown: 0.515 msec > > after the first 3 or 4 exceptions: 0.720 msec (not kidding) > > > After that point, the performance suffered consistently without > > mattering > > if exceptions were anymore thrown or not. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "JVM Languages" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=. > > -- > GMail doesn't have rotating .sigs, but you can see mine > athttp://www.ccil.org/~cowan/signatures
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=.
