On Feb 26, 2014, at 2:15 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> I have posted a new webrev taking this approach:
>>
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8035279/webrev.01/
>>
>> A review would be appreciated.
>>
Thanks for the suggestions …
> […]
> private int firstNonzeroIntNum() {
> int fn = firstNonzeroIntNumPlusTwo - 2;
I made all suggested changes except the third line below. Why do we test for
equality with -3? If the primitive int default value of zero is used, for
firstNonzeroIntNumPlusTwo, as it is, then we should still test whether fn
equals -2, n'est-ce pas?
> private int firstNonzeroIntNum() {
> int fn = firstNonzeroIntNumPlusTwo - 2;
> if (fn == -3) { // firstNonzeroIntNum not initialized yet
> // Search for the first nonzero int
> int i;
> int mlen = mag.length;
> for (i = mlen - 1; i >= 0 && mag[i] == 0; i--)
> ;
> fn = mlen - i - 1;
> firstNonzeroIntNumPlusTwo = fn + 2; // offset by two to initialize
> }
> return fn;
> }
>
> An unnecessary assignment is removed from the above method.
Yes I noticed that.
> --
>
> We can revisit and clean things up if/when the JMM is updated.
Is there an issue for JMM update to which a comment with a link to this thread
could be added?
Thanks,
Brian
