boxing + unboxing a VT is not a no-op ?

[Tobias Hartmann]

Thanks Remi!

When trying to re-produce, I'm hitting JDK-8207346. I'll fix that first and then investigate the
performance issue.

Tobias

On 13.07.2018 15:11, forax at univ-mlv.fr wrote:
> the source code is here:
>   https://github.com/forax/valuetype-lworld/blob/master/src/test/java/fr.umlv.valuetype/fr/umlv/valuetype/perf/ReifiedListBenchMark.java#L118
> 
> the instructions about how to build are here:
>   https://github.com/forax/valuetype-lworld
> 
> Rémi
> 
> ----- Mail original -----
>> De: "Tobias Hartmann" <tobias.hartmann at oracle.com>
>> À: "Remi Forax" <forax at univ-mlv.fr>, "valhalla-dev" <valhalla-dev at openjdk.java.net>
>> Envoyé: Vendredi 13 Juillet 2018 14:43:10
>> Objet: Re: boxing + unboxing a VT is not a no-op ?
> 
>> Hi Remi,
>>
>> thanks for reporting. Could you please provide the full source code so we can
>> have a closer look?
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Tobias
>>
>> On 12.07.2018 20:43, Remi Forax wrote:
>>> Hi guys,
>>> it seems that operations likes VT -> Object -> VT are not optimized has being a
>>> no-op.
>>>
>>> with IntBox being a value type that wrap an int,
>>> this code is slow (not very slow, i.e not interpreter slow)
>>>
>>>    public int valuelist_intbox_innervalue_inlined_reduce() {
>>>     __ByValue class Adder implements BiFunction<IntBox, IntBox, IntBox> {
>>>       private final boolean nonEmpty;
>>>       
>>>       Adder() {
>>>         nonEmpty = false;
>>>         throw new AssertionError();
>>>       }
>>>       
>>>       public IntBox apply(IntBox acc, IntBox element) {
>>>         return acc.add(element);
>>>       }
>>>     }
>>>     BiFunction<IntBox, IntBox, IntBox> mapper = __MakeDefault Adder();
>>>     var sum = IntBox.zero();
>>>     int size = valueList.size();
>>>     for(int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
>>>       sum = mapper.apply(sum, valueList.get(i));
>>>     }
>>>     return sum.intValue();
>>>   }
>>>
>>> while this code is fast (more than 10 times faster)
>>>   public int valuelist_intbox_inlined_reduce() {
>>>     var sum = IntBox.zero();
>>>     int size = valueList.size();
>>>     for(int i = 0; i < size; i++) {
>>>       sum = sum.add(valueList.get(i));
>>>     }
>>>     return sum.intValue();
>>>   }
>>>
>>> the difference is that instead of calling add on an IntBox to do the addition,
>>> i used an anonymous value class which implement a functional interface which
>>> used Objects.
>>> (valueList is just an array of IntBox wrapped in a value type).
>>>
>>> regards,
>>> Rémi
>>>