> I submitted PR #1 before, and there were too many changes. I split it
> into multiple PRs with small changes. This one is one of them.
>
> this PR removed the duplicate code for getChars in
> BigDecimal#StringBuilderHelper, i also make performance faster.
> Please review and don't
> Add the ability to pass heap segments to native code. This requires using
> `Linker.Option.critical(true)` as a linker option. It has the same
> limitations as normal critical calls, namely: upcalls into Java are not
> allowed, and the native function should return relatively quickly. Heap
>
On Thu, 19 Oct 2023 11:58:26 GMT, Claes Redestad wrote:
>> @cl4es
>>
>>> Good, narrows it down to what's going on in `prepend(long, byte[],
>>> String)`. Might boil down to `System.arraycopy`. This method might not be
>>> optimized for tiny arrays on all platforms. Specializing for
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 10:56:01 GMT, Doug Simon wrote:
>> The Graal code base has
>> [renamed](https://github.com/oracle/graal/commit/1e41203d10db321f86723eac90f6cd0573b08b33)
>> its module to `jdk.compiler.graal` as part of preparations for Project
>> Galahad. Due to the way Java modules work,
> The Graal code base has
> [renamed](https://github.com/oracle/graal/commit/1e41203d10db321f86723eac90f6cd0573b08b33)
> its module to `jdk.compiler.graal` as part of preparations for Project
> Galahad. Due to the way Java modules work, this requires a JDK change. The
> core of the issue is
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 00:56:21 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Add informative notes to BigInteger and BigDecimal about possible running
> times, etc.
The wording looks okay to me and I expect it will appear as an API note in
BigInteger.
However, for BigDecimal I suspect the h2 headings (for the next
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 20:24:26 GMT, Calvin Cheung wrote:
> I tried the above but got the following build error:
>
> ```
> Optimizing the exploded image
> Error occurred during initialization of boot layer
> java.lang.NullPointerException
> ExplodedImageOptimize.gmk:39: recipe for target
>
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 07:42:06 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> Yes, because of the following code further up in the same method:
>>
>> I think what you are actually doing here is supporting archiving of the boot
>> layer when the main module transitively depends on an incubator module. We
>> might
On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 06:54:16 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > Yes, because of the following code further up in the same method:
>
> I think what you are actually doing here is supporting archiving of the boot
> layer when the main module transitively depends on an incubator module. We
> might
On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 20:22:31 GMT, Calvin Cheung wrote:
> Yes, because of the following code further up in the same method:
I think what you are actually doing here is supporting archiving of the boot
layer when the main module transitively depends on an incubator module. We
might have to add
10 matches
Mail list logo