Third issue: no it doesn’t . For example for a LengthNotWritableData there can be elements larger then length that can be returned
> On 12 Nov 2014, at 11:41, Hannes Wallnoefer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > A few minor remarks: > > - Shouldn't ArrayData.increaseLength and .decreaseLength be protected instead > of public? > - Javadoc of ArrayData.length is missing # for link: {@link #setLength} > (although it's a private field anyway...) > - Is the (index >= len) check needed in NativeArray.sort? Does not > ArrayData.indexIterator take care of this? > - Some of the new tests use a mix of spaces/tabs for indentation. > > Otherwise looks good. > > Hannes > > Am 2014-11-11 um 17:37 schrieb Marcus Lagergren: >> Please review >> >> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035312 >> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8035312> >> >> There were several corner cases related to length in general and setting >> length in arrays to not writable in particular. >> None of the existing run times pass all the tests, so this was a very hard >> area to get right (added 6 new unit tests) >> >> I’ve also gotten rid of the special casey length not writable SwitchPoint in >> NativeArray - now that I have a filter for LengtNotWritableArray that can’t >> be cast to a ContinuousArrayData in the fast paths, this handles itself >> anyway. >> >> webrev at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~lagergren/8035312/ >> >> /M >> >
