[lworld] RFR: 8269279: [lworld] 8269231 causes build failures
shade at openjdk.java.net
Thu Jun 24 10:51:53 UTC 2021
On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 10:43:16 GMT, David Simms <dsimms at openjdk.org> wrote:
> > Oh! Right. Since we are casting to `uint64_t`, probably better use `UINT64_FORMAT_X` directly?
> Six of one, half a dozen of the other, the argument is a `jlong` and `JULONG_FORMAT_X` exists which required less typing. `JULONG_FORMAT_X` existence should probably invoke questions with the reader "an unsigned format for a clearly signed type ?".
Well, it confuses me a bit that we cast `jlong` to `uint64_t` and then format it as `JULONG_FORMAT_X`. Yes, it works right now because `JULONG_FORMAT_X` is defined as `UINT64_FORMAT_X`. I just thought it would be cleaner to say `jlong` -> `uint64_t` -> `UINT64_FORMAT_X`.
More information about the valhalla-dev