Valhalla Minimal Value Types review invitation
john.r.rose at oracle.com
Wed Apr 12 10:09:00 UTC 2017
On Apr 11, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Karen Kinnear <karen.kinnear at oracle.com> wrote:
> Summary of requested modifications from early prototyping experiments. Followed by action items.
Thanks, Karen. It is very, very helpful to have all these points rolled up like this.
I just updated the posted proposal to respond to your points 1 to 13.
I should get through the rest of the points this week.
There are only two places so far where I have had to disagree slightly.
> On Apr 11, 2017, at 3:38 PM, Karen Kinnear <karen.kinnear at oracle.com> wrote:
> 6. Restrictions on the POJO:
> 8. May not inherit from any interfaces
It is useful and harmless for the POJO to implement interfaces.
In the new section "Boxing, unboxing, and borrowing" I touch on this.
> 12. vdefault/vwithfield
> restrictions: vdefault only within constructor, vwithfield only within the class
> note: temporary issue: since DVT has no constructor or other methods, must allow
> vdefault also within the DVT and vwithfield across VCC/DVT pairs.
> note: a value type array allows default value to escape
I added discussion of restrictions on these bytecodes.
Bottom line: There is no reason to restrict vdefault.
Talk to you soon!
P.S. The referenced file and its source is enclosed for archiving and convenient access.
More information about the valhalla-spec-observers