Hi Paul,
On Feb 5, 2015, at 6:06 AM, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't claim to understand the fine details of these methods but i can see
> how the new method avoid loosing bits.
>
> 4947 private static long[] divRemNegativeLong(long n, long d) {
> 4948 if (n >= 0) {
> 4949 throw new IllegalArgumentException("Non-negative numerator");
> 4950 } else if (d == 1) {
> 4951 return new long[]{0, n};
> 4952 }
>
> Why not use an assert instead of an IAE since this is an internal method.
I had actually wondered whether this could just be a “trusted” method since the
check of the first parameter is already done in the calling code, then the
if-branch could be removed altogether, but I suppose the assert is safer.
> Also the case of d ==1 could be pulled out just like for the case of tmp
> being +ve:
>
> if (v1 == 1) {
> q1 = tmp;
> r_tmp = 0;
> } else if (tmp >= 0) {
> ...
> } else {
> ...
> }
>
> then the asserts would be:
>
> assert n < 0 : n;
> assert d != 1 : d;
Thanks for the suggestions. Please see updated patch:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8066842/webrev.01/
Brian
