Progress of patches

[Martin Buchholz]

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:25, Ulf Zibis <Ulf.Zibis at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 11.03.2010 05:42, schrieb Martin Buchholz:
>>
>> I couldn't resist making a similar change to isValidCodePoint.
>>
>> @@ -2678,7 +2678,8 @@
>>       * @since  1.5
>>       */
>>      public static boolean isValidCodePoint(int codePoint) {
>> -        return codePoint>= MIN_CODE_POINT&&  codePoint<= MAX_CODE_POINT;
>> +        int plane = codePoint>>>  16;
>> +        return plane<  ((MAX_CODE_POINT + 1)>>>  16);
>>      }
>>
>>      /**
>>
>> This is a more important optimization, since isValidCodePoint
>> almost always requires two compares, and this reduces it to one.
>>
>
> Why isn't this true for isSupplementaryCodePoint() too ?
> Particularly there the "cheap" compare against 0 can't be benefited.

Because almost all code points are actually BMP,
the naive implementation of isValidCodePoint will
almost always require one more branch than
isSupplementaryCodePoint,
making it more valuable to optimize.

>> (Still, none of these are really important, and no one will notice)

Martin