RFR 8134995(M): [REDO] GC: implement ranges (optionally constraints) for those flags that have them missing

[Kim Barrett]

On Sep 23, 2015, at 7:57 PM, sangheon.kim <sangheon.kim at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> I see now.  jintSize would be better than 4.  But I think even better would be pointer size,
>> though I haven’t found an existing constant for that.  Maybe sizeof(address)?
> We have 'const int wordSize = sizeof(char*)'.
> 
>> The only
>> disadvantage to that is the max value is then smaller on 64bit platforms than on 32bit
>> platforms.  I doubt the difference is interesting in practice though.
> I agree that there's no big difference in practice.
> I just wanted to avoid to have smaller upper limit for 64bit platforms.
> But if you prefer to use 'wordSize' instead of '4', I'm fine. It would give better readability.

Yes, please.