From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <helmut.brandl@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3ABAE7F736
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:08:11 +0200 (CEST)
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:zOrkXhc/jIYcZRJYl5/sZCkGlGMj4u6mDksu8pMizoh2WeGdxc6/YR7h7PlgxGXEQZ/co6odzbGG7+a6CCdZusvJmUtBWaIPfidNsd8RkQ0kDZzNImzAB9muURYHGt9fXkRu5XCxPBsdMs//Y1rPvi/6tmZKSV3BPAZ4bt74BpTVx5zukbvip9uJMk4R32f1SIgxBSv1hD2ZjtMRj4pmJ/R54TryiVwMRd5rw3h1L0mYhRf265T41pdi9yNNp6BprJYYAu3MVv9nFvkAUHxmbjh0t4XXskzIRA6Lo38dSXk+kxxSAgGD4gupcI32t37au+54xTXSF9f/S7wwEWCi4qNuVQOugj0OMTI92G7Smop2gb4N80HpnAB234OBONLdD/F5ZK6IIIsX
Authentication-Results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=helmut.brandl@gmx.net; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=helmut.brandl@gmx.net; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@mout.gmx.net
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  helmut.brandl@gmx.net) identity=pra; client-ip=212.227.17.21;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="helmut.brandl@gmx.net";
  x-sender="helmut.brandl@gmx.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: Pass (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: domain of
  helmut.brandl@gmx.net designates 212.227.17.21 as permitted
  sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=212.227.17.21;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="helmut.brandl@gmx.net";
  x-sender="helmut.brandl@gmx.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@mout.gmx.net) identity=helo;
  client-ip=212.227.17.21;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="helmut.brandl@gmx.net";
  x-sender="postmaster@mout.gmx.net";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CBAQA9vflVnBUR49Rey1w8EAEBAQEBAQEBEAEBAQEBBg0JCSEugh2CMAQRQDYCBRYLAgsDAgECAVgIAQGIFAEXAqVOg3OLd48PAYVXgSKFUYooglKBQwWNb4dvdpUOkhE4ggGCSYp9AQEB
X-IPAS-Result: A0CBAQA9vflVnBUR49Rey1w8EAEBAQEBAQEBEAEBAQEBBg0JCSEugh2CMAQRQDYCBRYLAgsDAgECAVgIAQGIFAEXAqVOg3OLd48PAYVXgSKFUYooglKBQwWNb4dvdpUOkhE4ggGCSYp9AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,541,1437429600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="147514634"
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Sep 2015 21:08:10 +0200
Received: from [192.168.1.122] ([189.250.213.143]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102)
 with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MMHaL-1ZWUEO0eUv-0083Zg for <caml-list@inria.fr>;
 Wed, 16 Sep 2015 21:08:09 +0200
To: caml-list@inria.fr
From: Helmut Brandl <helmut.brandl@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <55F9BE16.1020502@gmx.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 14:08:06 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID:  V03:K0:9qu+MldrtgMRC1+KBKRdWuUX+2FI+NJy7epo9jP+wI0+mTJMIat
 xxHBcReLafhMTItOEzMcFmGdZpn4+t26qdaFgIUREFfsbqNuC/Kx3SxtGSp5Gj1N5qKsFu9
 fZcicY3rIgEfEAFLtkLw+Zs9aqaaOctn76Qm1Dex4X1HiE7yPXR7q3/sOuENDIN1rgz3q+m
 abKx+rSYi2Rjno8vCoglg==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:X0aE3neqO8s=:gcAA/wr268tfltUnM5aOy9
 cT2Ewp2QxxRTViOEYT2Eurof0uv/zBNyqJ9qSMMiDWRshzyQpFWX8+pF92ZA7oo3hK7zbB1zA
 kfJQrr9szplGBwOF1t4rQ74onom792PIm1w/xzVCXsx3bYJGrar9TDs1blJJv+po8a8gCeLCi
 ma3jw6NYdiLhZikxJzV3BPzA3rF47HCPOr5eNiHXMLr90MpDFoA1SkIJslL9EERYuQh4TvAyg
 UL5EJ8S6gGCkS3cYhBDAklWWDu0Irh084Q7D8yXcjL4sRGyIqX34aLGFEavC5TLytl3y7VbTn
 uAzsO9SYqX91cddhEywuCTH39mbAmjt8+bvoFDWQ6ObWRJI2ouGdtpS+TNw11D7GWCowDWtK7
 1jd5AO6xTKpgbM64wOhOqargWYHUA7Wz2ELATFD7/QYV5sAjUFhEZW3sjlYzWwD3DYDvBKd6/
 S6PQWAsyoqlQUuSlASd5oBe/sX+OE8/eIJtQWUiEV5Zs8JUI1u45zFQ7WeUoU0PsBmEZ9TQBy
 UbpgZfgTm/ECHbQ+j9BhEFF3RQtjmfPgsdHDU1DD4HJZ5YcwvQE+bQkn7TVDq1TF2qN4JXIiZ
 cQqfm7kt6iFhAEFBj5ENRyGu84zhB3SnD9iEupfzA1ckhh+w7oLSse/0DHtMbD3s2tdNwOI8F
 gOUv7lp1tRpMR6bKETLQmd2vFg0fDycg33JnHs/VrUhVIJQx/fn6OgEn0negV4QdwEwiyRNO1
 lGYj4p4YWKzDa4cbr6Xmcwssku7TTVqGwYMWhA==
Subject: [Caml-list] Performance penalty of exception handling

Hi all,

I use exeption handling quite frequently even in inner loops. A common 
pattern:

     let some_function ... =
             ...
            if cannot_compute then raise Not_found else value

     try
         let value = some_function ... in
         ...
     with Not_found ->
        handle_exception

I use this pattern even if the direct caller of "some_function" handles 
the exception. In many cases I could design "some_function" in a way 
that it returns an optional value and check the optional value in the 
caller. Is this significantly (at least 10%) faster? If not, I would 
stay with my present design. However I am pressed for performance in the 
inner loops (I am only interested in compilation to native).

Is there any information available on the preformance penalty of 
exception handling? Any hints? Thanks in advance.

Regards
Helmut