RFR: 8366702: C2 SuperWord: refactor VTransform vector nodes [v4]

[Galder Zamarreño]

On Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:32:21 GMT, Emanuel Peter <epeter at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> We could. But I'd prefer to do the req assert before I access any inputs, to avoid failing in the input access.
>> 
>> And I also like the parallel pattern of fetching the inputs, moving it inside the if/else would in my opinion make it harder to read.
>> 
>> We could also just drop the assert and rely on the asserts in the input fetch.
>> 
>> Personally, I would leave it as I have it now, but I'm open to a majority vote ;)
>> 
>> @chhagedorn What would you prefer?
>
> I discussed a bit with @chhagedorn .
> 
> He thought I could move down the `Node* in3 = apply_state.transformed_node(in_req(3))`.
> 
> Maybe if we extend the element wise ops to cases with yet another input it will have to be moved up again, but it's fine to move down for now.
> 
> The assert we'll leave where it is, it makes more sense as a precondition. As such, I'll move it to the top of the method.

Sounds good, thanks @eme64

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27056#discussion_r2336833959