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: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-gc-dev/attachments/20150430/7fb79736/attachment.html>


More information about the hotspot-gc-dev mailing list