RFR 8014076: Arrays parallel and serial sorting improvements

Chris Hegarty chris.hegarty at oracle.com
Tue May 7 17:13:25 UTC 2013

On 05/07/2013 05:04 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
> The "currently" MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN statement bothers me. Can we remove currently?

No problem.  That would read...

   "When the sub-array length reaches a {@linlplain #MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN
    minimum granularity}, the sub-array is sorted using the appropriate
    Arrays.sort method."

 > I would expect to see currently if the numerical value of 
MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN was presented. We may change the threshold but we're 
otherwise committed to the constant name for the threshold.

I really don't care much for MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN. I left it out from the 
original push, then flip flopped a few times on it. I don't like 
{@value}, as the field would still need to be public, but not referenced 
in the docs. I could be persuaded to go either way on it, but it is not 
worth spending time on.


> Mike
> On May 7 2013, at 07:51 , Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> Doug has made some updates to the java.util.Arrays sorting code to provide stable sorting. There have also been some changes to the original Parallel Array Sorting ( MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN is public again ).
>> Right now a copy of this work is sitting in the lambda repo. This issue proposed to integrate this work into jdk8.
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8014076/ver.00/specdiff/java/util/Arrays.html
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8014076/ver.00/webrev/
>> Thanks,
>> -Chris.

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list