Do we need an unsigned multiplyHigh?

Peter Lawrey peter.lawrey at gmail.com
Tue Sep 26 10:20:59 UTC 2017


We have arrays already but we don't have primitive types of more than
64-bit. If we had uint128 for example we wouldn't need this method.

On 26 Sep. 2017 11:31, "Andrew Haley" <aph at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 26/09/17 08:25, Peter Lawrey wrote:
> > I am looking forward to intrinsic support for 128 bit math using ?Long2?
> > and XMM (or even YMM, ZMM) instructions.
> > This is the best way forward, I hope.
> >
> > Personally I would like to see a long long type, or even uint128,
> uint256,
> > uint512 style notation.
> >
> > Another option might be something like long<128> or an annotation like
> > @uint128 long or even @decimal128 double but who knows.
>
> Do you actually need any of that?  I think vector types make more sense.
> Java already has a great many scalar types.
>
> --
> Andrew Haley
> Java Platform Lead Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20170926/4926430d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the security-dev mailing list