Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:44:19 +0200 From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kern/99979: Get Ready for Kernel Module in C++ Message-ID: <20060714074419.GC14113@britannica.bec.de> In-Reply-To: <ac7deb50607122246k7df45813hf9cb34e1f8269c77@mail.gmail.com> References: <courier.44B37714.00004B4D@intron.ac> <868xn0z8w9.fsf@xps.des.no> <courier.44B3B9A0.0000609C@intron.ac> <20060711152949.GB1463@merlin.emma.line.org> <1152642474.29859@origin.intron.ac> <3bbf2fe10607111437h6547432fn2887348708df29a4@mail.gmail.com> <20060712113516.GC2162@britannica.bec.de> <ac7deb50607120603t6607ff97j4f5cf1749b6e426b@mail.gmail.com> <20060712132059.GA3906@britannica.bec.de> <ac7deb50607122246k7df45813hf9cb34e1f8269c77@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 11:16:18AM +0530, Kamal R. Prasad wrote:
> Im sorry I didn't understand you. setjmp() stores a few register contents
> [notably ip] in a jmpbuf -which are restored after a longjmp(). How is the
> try/catch mechanism more efficient than a setjmp()/longjmp() in terms of
> space/time complexity?
Because you have to run setjmp for *every* try{}, independent of whether
it is ever actually needed.
Joerg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060714074419.GC14113>