RFR: 8370983: Add methods for primitive operators to support method handles

[Shaojin Wen]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 04:55:31 GMT, Joe Darcy <darcy at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Initial draft of a partial set of methods wrapping primitive operators to get feedback on the class providing this functionality.

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/Operators.java line 73:

> 71:      *
> 72:      * @implSpec
> 73:      * This method wraps the {@code <} operator on {@code int} augments.

Suggestion:

     * This method wraps the {@code <} operator on {@code int} arguments.

typo

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/Operators.java line 219:

> 217:      * @param subtrahend the second operand
> 218:      */
> 219:     public static int substract(int minuend, int subtrahend) {return minuend - subtrahend;}

Suggestion:

    public static int subtract(int minuend, int subtrahend) {return minuend - subtrahend;}

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/Operators.java line 231:

> 229:      * @param a the operand
> 230:      */
> 231:     public static int increment(int a) {return a++;}

Suggestion:

    public static int increment(int a) {return ++a;}

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/Operators.java line 241:

> 239:      * @param a the operand
> 240:      */
> 241:     public static int decrement(int a) {return a--;}

Suggestion:

    public static int decrement(int a) {return --a;}

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/Operators.java line 698:

> 696:      * This method corresponds to the {@code nop} JVM instruction.
> 697:      */
> 698:     public void nop() {return;}

Suggestion:

    public static void nop() {return;}

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28081#discussion_r2482094079
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28081#discussion_r2482099634
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28081#discussion_r2482091037
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28081#discussion_r2482091703
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28081#discussion_r2482101678