RFR (S): 8075288: Remove dictionary NULL check on common path of BlockFreeList methods
Jon Masamitsu
jon.masamitsu at oracle.com
Thu Apr 30 07:00:32 UTC 2015
On 4/29/2015 11:09 PM, Jungwoo Ha wrote:
>
>
> That style is my doing and my preference. There remains
> differing opinions in the
> group on the style and some consider the accessors wasted effort
> but I find them
> useful often enough to prefer them.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> I saw this after reading runtime thread. Things are getting confused.
> We can do
>
> BlockFreelist *dictionary() { return &_dictionary; }
>
> and keep dictionary()->XXX
> This is actually consistent with _humongous_blocklist.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jwha/8079091/webrev.01
> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejwha/8079091/webrev.01>
> current one has
> BlockFreelist &dictionary() { return _dictionary; }
>
> and changed it to dictionary().XXX
Jungwoo,
Sorry for the differing suggestions on our part. I think Kim's point
was to not have the accessors. I vote to (1) keep the accessors (which
are currently there) and use (2)
> BlockFreelist *dictionary() { return &_dictionary; }
and the style dictionary()->XXX (to minimize changes).
Kim,
How about we let Jungwoo integrate with the style (1) and
(2) I outline above so he is not caught in the middle. You
and I can talk about it on the side.
Jon
>
> Whichever you guys prefer...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20150430/7fb79736/attachment.htm>
More information about the hotspot-gc-dev
mailing list