JEP proposed to target JDK 11: 318: Epsilon: An Arbitrarily Low-Overhead Garbage Collector
Roger.Riggs at Oracle.com
Thu Jan 18 13:56:47 UTC 2018
Does the entire test suite pass with this collector?
In spite of Andrew's point, there are numerous tests of behavior that
are effects/side effects of
collectors that will fail. Does the JCK pass with this option (the all
If not will, will you modify all those tests to @require other
collectors so they are not run
It would be bad form to commit a change that causes a large number of
regular tests to fail.
On 1/18/2018 6:10 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> On 01/18/2018 10:26 AM, Erik Österlund wrote:
>> On 2018-01-18 10:12, Stefan Johansson wrote:
>>> On 2018-01-17 10:43, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>>>> name. So, as long as there is no overwhelming amount of strong opinions against it, I'd keep the
>>>> name as is.
>>> I'm with Charlie here, I think -XX:+UseNoGC would be better and much more descriptive name for
>>> this feature.
>> This is not a garbage collector, because it does not collect garbage. It is an allocator. Therefore,
>> I also think the -XX:+UseNoGC name is more descriptive.
> All right, I added -XX:+UseNoGC as the alias option to the current development patch:
> I still believe the purpose for this thread is not about getting tangled up in implementation
> details and bikeshedding. We would decide which alias to drop later. Makes everyone happy at the moment?
More information about the jdk-dev