Hi again, Here is a new webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8076759/webrev.01/
Pruned the implementation details from expandCapacity Javadoc, and about to submit a CCC for it. Thanks, -Aleksey. On 05.05.2015 16:33, Roger Riggs wrote: > Hi Aleksey, > > Thanks for checking the rounding alternative. > > As for the CCC, since the implementation details are in the javadoc > then it will be needed either to remove the details or to update them. > I'd be inclined to try to remove them since they are there primarily for > performance. > > Thanks, Roger > > > > On 5/5/2015 4:31 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: >> Hi Roger, >> >> On 05/01/2015 08:19 PM, Roger Riggs wrote: >>> Is there any additional benefit by rounding up the next multiple of 4 >>> or 8. >>> That would avoid a few wasted bytes at the end of the buffer modulo the >>> allocation size. >> It does not seem to help any further. Tried "plus32-round8", as in: >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8076759/patches.txt >> >> ...and it performs similar to "plus32": >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8076759/data-foot.png >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~shade/8076759/data-perf.png >> >>> Otherwise, looks fine to me also. >> I actually wonder if my change in ensureCapacity Javadoc requires a CCC? >> On that topic, I also tempted to remove the implementation details from >> the Javadoc there, since it does not play well with "describe what you >> will do, not how would you do it". >> >> Thanks, >> -Aleksey. >> >
