diff --git a/report/report.tex b/report/report.tex
index 894ba6e..e88b76b 100644
--- a/report/report.tex
+++ b/report/report.tex
@@ -187,7 +187,9 @@ has a quite big overhead, which is introduced whenever a \lstc{try} block is
 encountered. Instead, it is often preferred to have strictly no overhead when
 no exception happens, at the cost of a greater overhead when an exception is
 actually fired (after all, they are supposed to be \emph{exceptional}). For
-more details on C++ exception handling, see~\cite{dinechin2000exn}.
+more details on C++ exception handling, see~\cite{koening1990exception}
+(especially Section~16.5). Possible implementation mechanisms are also
+presented in~\cite{dinechin2000exn}.
 
 In both of these two previous cases, performance \emph{can} be a problem. In
 the latter, a slow unwinding directly impacts the overall program performance,
diff --git a/shared/report.bib b/shared/report.bib
index e0ffabd..9c5c47b 100644
--- a/shared/report.bib
+++ b/shared/report.bib
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@
 }
 
 @article{dinechin2000exn,
-    title={C++ exception handling \qtodo{CHECK}},
+    title={C++ exception handling},
     author={De Dinechin, Christophe},
     journal={IEEE Concurrency},
     volume={8},
@@ -43,6 +43,19 @@
     publisher={IEEE}
 }
 
+@article{koening1990exception,
+    title={Exception handling for C++},
+    author={Koening, Andrew and Stroustrup, Bjarne},
+    journal={Journal of Object-Oriented Programming},
+    volume={3},
+    number={2},
+    pages={16--33},
+    year={1990},
+    publisher={SIGS Publications},
+    url={http://www.stroustrup.com/except89.pdf}
+}
+
+
 @online{niditoexn,
     title={Exceptions in C with Longjmp and Setjmp},
     author={Nidito, Francesco},