[lworld] RFR: Unsafe primitives for values
rwestrel at redhat.com
Thu Dec 13 09:14:59 UTC 2018
> Your memory is correct and we went with the "Unsafe::withXXX" option
> initially. John talked to me a couple weeks ago that he suggests to go
> with the "private buffer" option which is more robust than the "new
> withXXX API points, 10 of them (primitive + ref + value)". With the
> private buffer option, the existing Unsafe::putXXX APIs on the buffer
> will have predictable effects. The JIT can easily eliminate the
> allocation away the buffer. John sketched the rough idea of this option
> . I did prototype the withXXX option to get a sense of the usage of
> these new API points. I do like this private buffer option better.
Thanks for the background info.
More information about the valhalla-dev