Use of long in Nashorn

Hannes Wallnoefer hannes.wallnoefer at
Tue Dec 15 09:15:15 UTC 2015

I spent significant time testing this with octane and sunspider, and 
didn't find any regressions.


Am 2015-12-15 um 09:55 schrieb Marcus Lagergren:
> All octane benchmarks and stuff like that run with no serious regressions, I hope?
>> On 14 Dec 2015, at 17:30, Hannes Wallnoefer <hannes.wallnoefer at> wrote:
>> For the record, I tried the integer index optimization for array iterators, but didn't really see a difference running a microbenchmark using Array.prototype.forEach, so I left it out after all.
>> Hannes
>> Am 2015-12-11 um 16:30 schrieb Hannes Wallnoefer:
>>> Am 2015-12-11 um 16:21 schrieb Attila Szegedi:
>>>> On Dec 11, 2015, at 4:08 PM, Hannes Wallnoefer <hannes.wallnoefer at> wrote:
>>>>> I didn't implement the int/double overloading of array iterator actions. Unless I missed something, I would have to implement two forEach methods in each subclass, which seem ugly and error prone.
>>>> You haven’t missed anything; that’s exactly how that would work. Ultimately, if we had macros in Java, this wouldn’t need to look ugly, but we don’t have them, so… Performance optimizations are sometimes ugly :-) Anyway, this needn’t happen now, although ultimately I don’t think it’d be much of a big deal to implement, even with the unfortunate code duplication, and we still wouldn’t always force-promote the parameter type for the callback functions to double.
>>> Ok, you convinced me. I'll add that optimization an upcoming webrev. Still waiting for other reviews though.
>>> Hannes

More information about the nashorn-dev mailing list