On 8/6/19 12:47 PM, Vladimir Yaroslavskiy wrote:
I moved Object sorting related stuff after primitives sorting methods
to separate functionality logically.
Sure, fine to keep that all together. I can move that back:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8226297/webrev04/
The order of methods in my version is:
1. primitives (sequential sorting)
- int
- long
- byte
- char
- short
- float
- double
The order for sequential sorting of primitives in Arrays.java checked
into the JDK is:
- int
- long
* short
* char
* byte
- float
- double
It simplifies the webrev for reviewing to keep that ordering, so that's
what I've done.
Thanks,
-Brent
Вторник, 6 августа 2019, 21:35 +03:00 от Brent Christian
<brent.christ...@oracle.com>:
Hi, Laurent
I'm not sure what exactly is causing the problem, but here's my hunch:
In Vladimir's version of Arrays.java:
MIN_ARRAY_SORT_GRAN
NaturalOrder
rangeCheck
got moved around, but were unchanged.
In the interest of keeping the change as simple as possible, I restored
these to their original location, so they don't show up in my changes.
That could confuse things when comparing diffs.
One idea would be to restore those elements back in their original
locations in your version, and re-generate your patch. I don't know if
that would be less work than just comparing raw files.
Alternatively, if it would be easiest for those familiar with the
evolution of this fix to leave things where Vladimir had them, I can do
that.
Thanks,
-Brent
On 8/6/19 6:32 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
> Hi Brent,
>
> Thank you for sponsoring this patch.
>
> I tried to compare your webrev against my latest (diff patch
files) but
> it gives me too many changes lines.
>
> Do you have another idea to see incremental changes only ?
> (anyway I can compare raw files)
>
> Thanks,
> Laurent
>
> Le lun. 5 août 2019 à 23:43, Brent Christian
<brent.christ...@oracle.com <mailto:brent.christ...@oracle.com>
> <mailto:brent.christ...@oracle.com>> a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
> Please review Vladimir Yaroslavskiy's changes to DualPivotQuickSort
> (seen earlier[1] on this alias). I will be sponsoring this change.
>
> I have a webrev against jdk-jdk here:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bchristi/8226297/webrev03-rfr/
>
> (Note that I did a little re-ordering, and removed some superfluous
> spacing changes, in order to simplify the webrev. I've also included
> Vladimir's FailedFloat[2] test case.)
>
> Information about benchmarking the changes was posted[3] recently.
> An automated test run passes cleanly.
>
> Thanks!
> -Brent
> --
> 1.
>
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2019-July/061363.html
>
> 2.
>
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2019-July/061513.html
>
> 3.
>
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2019-July/061553.html
>
--
Vladimir Yaroslavskiy
