RFR (L) 8037210: Get rid of char-based descriptions 'J' of basic types

[Vladimir Ivanov]

Here's a version with the new naming scheme:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8037210/webrev.03.naming

I like existing naming scheme and OBJECT/VOID/LONG/etc names are quite 
popular(e.g. Wrapper & ASM (Opcodes) use them). So, I'm in favor of 
leaving it as is.

Best regards,
Vladimir Ivanov

On 3/26/14 12:24 AM, Christian Thalinger wrote:
> +     enum BasicType {
> +         L_TYPE('L', Object.class, Wrapper.OBJECT),  // all reference types
> +         I_TYPE('I', int.class,    Wrapper.INT),
> +         J_TYPE('J', long.class,   Wrapper.LONG),
> +         F_TYPE('F', float.class,  Wrapper.FLOAT),
> +         D_TYPE('D', double.class, Wrapper.DOUBLE),  // all primitive types
> +         V_TYPE('V', void.class,   Wrapper.VOID);    // not valid in all contexts
>
> I would suggest to not name them X_TYPE but give them meaningful names like Int, Float, Void.  The enum BasicType already infers that it’s a type.  If you think it’s not clear that it’s a type just use BasicType.Double in that places.
>
> On Mar 24, 2014, at 9:29 AM, Vladimir Ivanov <vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> Updated version:
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8037210/webrev.03/
>>
>> - changed the way how arrays of types are created:
>>         static final BasicType[] ALL_TYPES = BasicType.values();
>>         static final BasicType[] ARG_TYPES = Arrays.copyOf(ALL_TYPES, ALL_TYPES.length-1);
>>
>> - added a test for BasicType (LambdaFormTest.testBasicType).
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>
>> On 3/22/14 2:08 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote:
>>> John, thanks for the feedback.
>>>
>>> Updated webrev:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8037210/webrev.02
>>>
>>> Also moved LambdaForm.testShortenSignature() into a stand-alone unit test.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Vladimir Ivanov
>>>
>>> On 3/21/14 10:54 PM, John Rose wrote:
>>>> On Mar 21, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Vladimir Ivanov
>>>> <vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com <mailto:vladimir.x.ivanov at oracle.com>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think about the following:
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8037210/webrev.01/
>>>>
>>>> That looks nice.  Strong typing; who woulda' thunk it.  :-)
>>>>
>>>> The uses of ".ordinal()" are the extra cost relative to using just small
>>>> integers.  They seem totally reasonable in the code.
>>>>
>>>> I suggest either wrapping "ordinal" as something like "id" or else
>>>> changing temp names like "id" to "ord", to reinforce the use of a common
>>>> name.
>>>>
>>>> Don't make the enum class public.  And especially don't make the mutable
>>>> arrays public:
>>>>
>>>> +        public static final BasicType[] ALL_TYPES = { L_TYPE, I_TYPE,
>>>> J_TYPE, F_TYPE, D_TYPE, V_TYPE };
>>>> +        public static final BasicType[] ARG_TYPES = { L_TYPE, I_TYPE,
>>>> J_TYPE, F_TYPE, D_TYPE };
>>>>
>>>> — John
>>>>
>>>> P.S.  That would only be safe if we had (what we don't yet) a notion of
>>>> frozen arrays like:
>>>>
>>>> +        public static final BasicType final[] ALL_TYPES = { L_TYPE,
>>>> I_TYPE, J_TYPE, F_TYPE, D_TYPE, V_TYPE };
>>>> +        public static final BasicType final[] ARG_TYPES = { L_TYPE,
>>>> I_TYPE, J_TYPE, F_TYPE, D_TYPE };
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> mlvm-dev mailing list
>>>> mlvm-dev at openjdk.java.net
>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mlvm-dev mailing list
>> mlvm-dev at openjdk.java.net
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> mlvm-dev mailing list
> mlvm-dev at openjdk.java.net
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/mailman/listinfo/mlvm-dev
>