Re: perf & Try Catch
From: Jon Skeet [C# MVP] (skeet_at_pobox.com)
Date: 01/01/05
- Next message: Bob Grommes: "Re: C# properties: nothing more syntactic sugar for getters and setters"
- Previous message: Ron: "Re: calling controls"
- In reply to: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Next in thread: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Reply: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2005 15:14:13 -0000
David Levine <noSpamdlevineNNTP2@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> > Having had a look at the JITted code, I think it's more a case of the
> > JIT not being able to optimise as heavily, not being able to enregister
> > as much.
>
> There may be additional housekeeping that isn't obvious just from the JITted
> code. Also, did you compile with debug or release settings? (it could make a
> difference in how aggressive the optimizations are).
I compiled without any specific optimisation or debug settings (just
the default) which I believe isn't particularly optimised, but doesn't
have debug information either.
> > Personally I think that apart from a very, *very* few situations,
> > exception handling should be implemented according to elegant design
> > rather than optimal performance. In the case we're talking about, the
> > processing within the loop would have to be *very* simple for the cost
> > of adding the try/catch to end up being particularly significant.
>
> I agree completely - design for correctness first, then go back and look at
> optimizations as needed. However, this only came up because a statement was
> made that there was no cost at all to using a try block, and that statement,
> as far as I can tell, is false.
Agreed. I think I'd say "virtually no cost" to give an appropriate
impression of how small it is in comparison with almost any other
performance penalties, but it's non-zero. At least, it is in some
cases... it could well be that if the JIT is already hampered by other
characteristics of the method, there really *is* no cost. That's a bit
more than I'm willing to investigate atm :)
-- Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
- Next message: Bob Grommes: "Re: C# properties: nothing more syntactic sugar for getters and setters"
- Previous message: Ron: "Re: calling controls"
- In reply to: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Next in thread: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Reply: David Levine: "Re: perf & Try Catch"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
