Are .NET Exceptions Really That Slow?

Performance impact of .NET anomalies: The truth revealed

.NET's abnormal performance issues have been controversial. Some people think it is extremely slow, while others think its impact is insignificant. To unravel this mystery, let’s delve into the question, “How slow are .NET exceptions?”

The argument that exceptions are slow is that exception handling requires stack unwinding and calling error handlers, which consumes a lot of resources. However, opponents of this view point to benchmarks showing that the performance degradation caused by anomalies is minimal.

In response to these different views, experts gave their opinions:

• Eric Lippert (Skeet): "Under normal use, exceptions are not so slow that their use should be avoided."
• Matteo Mariani: "The performance cost of exceptions is negligible."
• Niels Brumme: "Exceptions are designed to be efficient and should not be avoided because of so-called performance issues."

The argument in favor of using exceptions is that other factors such as code complexity and caching issues also affect performance. Additionally, using error codes to handle errors can also cause cache misses, negating the purported performance benefits of exceptions.

All in all, the claim that .NET is unusually slow is somewhat exaggerated. While there may be a performance impact in specific situations, avoiding exceptions simply because of performance concerns is generally unnecessary. The key is to use exceptions wisely and only in appropriate situations to ensure that the code is correct and easy to debug.

The above is the detailed content of Are .NET Exceptions Really That Slow?. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!