Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 55679 invoked from network); 17 Nov 2009 17:21:33 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 17 Nov 2009 17:21:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 43981 invoked by uid 500); 17 Nov 2009 17:21:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 43885 invoked by uid 500); 17 Nov 2009 17:21:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 43874 invoked by uid 99); 17 Nov 2009 17:21:32 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:21:32 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jessewilson@google.com designates 216.239.33.17 as permitted sender) Received: from [216.239.33.17] (HELO smtp-out.google.com) (216.239.33.17) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:21:30 +0000 Received: from wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com (wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com [172.24.198.65]) by smtp-out.google.com with ESMTP id nAHHL7fT031453 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:21:08 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=beta; t=1258478468; bh=ObKw9CrE5ozc+y/wVKXBTzb9DXE=; h=MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Content-Type; b=d6kK1T2Dm77gFd4IbywlxhqhO8ZlkZmq+ccbFIrD6sq1BrgOkvOnAxwXVwouUgRgS I6INRhh3HAu3NKsoXFF4g== DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id: subject:to:content-type:x-system-of-record; b=L1dgEVBx2l2ljPsAhO5PgmRdf5fOo1o9nuCZ7mCv5H7E1AWRs0/GkJtWGbMAcV7dL cHJMLeOGCTQKQhmIwgKmg== Received: from iwn2 (iwn2.prod.google.com [10.241.68.66]) by wpaz1.hot.corp.google.com with ESMTP id nAHHL4Z5009106 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:21:05 -0800 Received: by iwn2 with SMTP id 2so173378iwn.1 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:21:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.153.69 with SMTP id j5mr896468ibw.33.1258478464067; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:21:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jesse Wilson Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 09:20:44 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Doubting exception priority compatibility To: dev@harmony.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636d33c7cceeea0047894590a X-System-Of-Record: true --001636d33c7cceeea0047894590a Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 For better or for worse, Dalvik was changed long ago to ignore exception priorities. We get exception messages for NPEs and save branches. The full set of deltas are here: http://www.google.com/codesearch?q=multiple+errors+lang:java+package:git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/dalvik.git 2009/11/17 Alexei Fedotov > > I don't argue changing exception order for a particular case if the > change improves code simplicity and gives performance benefit on > important real load, e.g. the change improved Eclipse startup time by > 4%. > I think the primary difference in our thinking is how much we value exception priority consistency. I don't believe it has any value and therefore we're imposing an unnecessary constraint on our code. Does anyone have a real world example, (perhaps a bugreport) demonstrating where exception priority incompatibility has caused grief? --001636d33c7cceeea0047894590a--