> On Oct 20, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan > <sundararajan.athijegannat...@oracle.com> wrote: > > * StandardOperation.java is missing copyright. > > * NamedOperation.java is missing copyright. > > * CompositeOperation.java is missing copyright.
Indeed; added copyrights. > * Can CompositeOperation be final? Well, it’s hard to see why would someone want to subclass it, but I also don’t really see why someone shouldn’t be able to do it, to maybe add some language-specific information and still have it be recognized externally as CompositeOperation. (Same reasoning goes for NamedOperation, I guess). Do you have an rationale for making it final? > > * Unrelated ArrayData change? Unused method? Yes. I was following a change in the parameter type from String to Operation and stumbled upon it. > * NashornCallSiteDescriptor may have explanation as to why 18 bits are > sufficient for "program point" [now that flag bits are used for encoding > operation enums as well] I agree, I added an explanation. > > That's all I could find... > > +1 > > -Sundar > > On 10/20/2015 1:41 PM, Attila Szegedi wrote: >> Please review JDK-8139931 "Introduce Operation objects in Dynalink instead >> of string encoding" at >> <http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~attila/8139931/webrev.jdk9> for >> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8139931> >> >> This is admittedly a big one. It is also the last in the pipeline of the >> internal Dynalink cleanups, so we’ve reached the end of that! >> >> Thanks, >> Attila. >
