On 05/05/2014 03:16 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi,
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8042355
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8042355-sorted-short-circuit/webrev/
This is an optimization to ensure that sorted() in sequential pipelines does
not aggressively push all
On May 6, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
On 05/05/2014 03:16 PM, Paul Sandoz wrote:
Hi,
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8042355
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8042355-sorted-short-circuit/webrev/
This is an optimization to ensure
This is an optimization that is theoretically possible (and was
anticipated in the design), but in reality is likely to be so
low-priority that it would be a really long time before it was worth
putting engineering resources on this. It would have to be an unordered
stream, and we'd have to
Hi,
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8042355
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8042355-sorted-short-circuit/webrev/
This is an optimization to ensure that sorted() in sequential pipelines does
not aggressively push all sorted elements downstream if the pipeline is known
Looks good to me.
On May 5 2014, at 06:16 , Paul Sandoz paul.san...@oracle.com wrote:
Hi,
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8042355
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~psandoz/jdk9/JDK-8042355-sorted-short-circuit/webrev/
This is an optimization to ensure that sorted() in sequential
