What's the status of / relation between "JEP 169: Value Objects" / "Value Types for Java" / "Object Layout"

Jochen Theodorou blackdrag at gmx.org
Thu Jan 29 11:55:39 UTC 2015

Am 29.01.2015 12:02, schrieb Daniel Latrémolière:
>> I just want to quickly summarize my
>> current findings here and gently ask for feedback in case you think
>> I've totally misunderstood something. Of course any comments and
>> additional information is highly welcome as well.
> I don't know if that can be useful, but here is my point of view of
> developer oriented towards the question: "What feature for solving my
> problem?". This contains probably some or many errors, but it is another
> point of view (only mine), if useful.
> 3) JVM can not move or clone objects (Project Panama off heap /
> PackedObjects)
> Constraint: developer need to manage externally the full lifecycle of
> object and need to choose when creating or destroying it. Object is
> off-heap and an handle is on-heap for managing off-heap part.
> Constraint: potential fragmentation of free memory when frequently
> creating and removing objects not having the same size (taking attention
> to object size vs. page size is probably important).
> Use-case "GC Latency": big data structure inducing GC latency when moved
> if stored in heap
> - All big chunks of data, like Big Data or textures in games, etc.
> - Few number of objects for being manageable more explicitly by
> developer (without too much work).
> Use-case "Native": communicate with native library
> - Modern version of JNI

 From that view it makes me wonder if that is really in the scope of JEP 

bye Jochen

Jochen "blackdrag" Theodorou - Groovy Project Tech Lead
blog: http://blackdragsview.blogspot.com/
german groovy discussion newsgroup: de.comp.lang.misc
For Groovy programming sources visit http://groovy-lang.org

More information about the valhalla-dev mailing list