On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:57:30 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The `@Stable` on the `index` field is incorrect, as stable only avoids >> inlining `0`. Solution is to use bit flip on the actual index (and rename >> the field to `flippedIndex`), so we use -1 to -256 (mapping to 0 to 255) and >> 0 the default value is used as an unset indicator. > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Encapsulate offsetIndex, share computation result Hmm, I don't think index is that closely tied to LF interpretation; it's only used to find the output values from a `Name`. After another more general look, I think we might just turn the `index` field final: all its other fields are already final, and the lazy setting of `index` is just a trivial attempt to avoid reallocation if the index is not initialized, and such an approach will actually be harmful once we have value objects from valhalla. Should I make it `final` instead, so we can prepare `Name` for the Valhalla value class migration? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20178#issuecomment-2228942425
