Review Request: 7088913/7088952 : Additions to primitive wrappers

Ulf Zibis Ulf.Zibis at
Thu Sep 22 13:23:23 UTC 2011

Am 22.09.2011 12:04, schrieb David Holmes:
> On 22/09/2011 7:40 PM, Ulf Zibis wrote:
>> Yep, not easy to make a right decision here.
>> One if the questions might be, if SIZE/BYTES are meant as resolution
>> (2**SIZE = number of distinct values) or as memory usage.
>> I would say: SIZE should be meant as resolution, but BYTES as memory
>> usage. This would add additional value to the new introduced constant.
>> So:
>> Boolean.SIZE = 1
>> Boolean.BYTES = 4 (8 for 64-bit build)
> I can support the SIZE == resolution position.
> But BYTES can't mean "memory usage" as that is totally VM dependent and also has platform 
> dependencies, and is not a constant as such due to the way different fields can be packed together.
See quote from the original bug report <>:
"The most frequent use of the SIZE constant is to determine the storage space requiresments of the 
type by Primitive.SIZE / Byte.SIZE"

So I would say, this bug is invalid.
The only reasonable use case/meaning seems to be to calculate footprint for serialization, which is 
AFAIK Java language dependent. Then Boolean.BYTES would become unambiguous too. But then the 
constants would better be defined

I'm additionally wondering, that a bug with state < accepted comes to process.


More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list