On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 03:09:53 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> There's already a bug for this:
> [JDK-8186958](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8186958). This
> includes creating a new API as well as fixing up a bunch of call sites.
> There's a partial list of call sites in java.base there. G
On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 01:35:23 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
There's already a bug for this:
[JDK-8186
On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 16:46:58 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> No, you don't need to do any rebasing; when the change is integrated, all
> these commits will automatically be squashed into a single commit. If that
> can't be done, the bot will detect it and give a warning, which will probably
> inclu
On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 01:35:23 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
No, you don't need to do any rebasing; whe
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 19:40:39 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - change KeyStructure to String
>> - fix test
>
> Regarding the number of test cases for `tableSizeForCases` and
> `popu
On Sat, 12 Mar 2022 01:35:23 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
> what I worried is, the boundary this is
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 19:40:39 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> I think we can rely on the monotonicity of these functions. If populating a
> map both with 49 and with 96 mappings results in a table length of 128, we
> don't need to test that all the intermediate inputs also result in a table
> length
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 19:40:39 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - change KeyStructure to String
>> - fix test
>
> Regarding the number of test cases for `tableSizeForCases` and
> `popu
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.op
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 19:09:25 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - change KeyStructure to String
>> - fix test
>
> test/jdk/java/util/HashMap/WhiteBoxResizeTest.java line 61:
>
>> 59:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 15:56:26 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - change KeyStructure to String
> - fix test
Regardin
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 15:56:26 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - change KeyStructure to String
> - fix test
![image]
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- change KeyStructure to String
- fix test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/74
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 01:42:19 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> refine test
>
> oops seems I wronglly added a teat case 0/1
> will delete it later
> @XenoAmess I don't think we need `KeySt
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 01:28:13 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
@RogerRiggs Good point about `Integer` bei
On Fri, 11 Mar 2022 01:28:13 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
oops seems I wronglly added a teat case 0/
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.op
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.op
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:37:58 GMT, Roger Riggs wrote:
> Heads up here! java.lang.Integer is specified as a value based class and
> should not be used where identity is needed.
> https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/17/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html
>
> I don't have a r
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:21:28 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> The difficulty with having a loop instead of constants is that the expected
> value now needs to be computed. We could probably use `tableSizeFor` to do
> this. But this is starting to get uncomfortably close to a testing
> antipattern wh
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.op
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 22:01:49 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> @stuart-marks please have a look in changes in the latest commit, I think
>> we'd better to manually create references for keys like that.
>
> Good point about WeakHashMap! I don't think we need a separate table. Since
> the value is held
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:10:31 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with five additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - clean out tests
>> - Remove 'randomness' keyword.
>> - Cleanup and commenting.
>> - initial rewrite of WhiteBoxResizeTe
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:22:29 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> test/jdk/java/util/HashMap/WhiteBoxResizeTest.java line 116:
>>
>>> 114: }
>>> 115:
>>> 116: void putN(Map map, int n) {
>>
>> @stuart-marks well we know this is correct for WeakHashMap when n <
>> IntegerCache.high because we have
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
manually create reference for ensuring test for WeakHashMap when
IntegerCache.high is configured/changed default valu
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:15:03 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with five additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - clean out tests
>> - Remove 'randomness' keyword.
>> - Cleanup and commenting.
>> - initial rewrite of WhiteBoxResizeTe
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:13:42 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with five additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - clean out tests
> - Remove 'randomness' keyword.
>
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with five additional
commits since the last revision:
- clean out tests
- Remove 'randomness' keyword.
- Cleanup and commenting.
- initial rewrite of WhiteBoxResizeTest
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 01:11:03 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Sorry, the test changes look like they're heading in the wrong direction. I
> tried to provide some hints for what I was looking for in my previous
> comments. At this point, I felt it would have been too time-consuming to
> provide a bun
On Sat, 5 Mar 2022 19:06:03 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refactor tests
Sorry, the test changes look like they'r
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 21:02:50 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>>> This actually tests three things: 1) table is lazily allocated, 2) default
>>> capacity is 16, and 3) using putAll to populate the map with 64 elements
>>> results in a table size of 128. This should really be broken into three
>>> separ
On Sat, 5 Mar 2022 19:29:17 GMT, liach wrote:
> this looks wrong, and the class instance is used nowhere later. should
> probably be removed.
@liach already removed in the latest commit.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431
On Sat, 5 Mar 2022 19:06:03 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refactor tests
test/jdk/java/util/HashMap/WhiteBoxHashM
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refactor tests
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
commits since the last revision:
- refactor tests
- refactor tests
- refactor WhiteBoxResizeTest
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.open
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 20:23:38 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> would you mind if I break WhiteBoxResizeTest class into several smaller Test
> classes, each focus on one of the test points you said?
Well, separate classes wouldn't be the approach that I'd take myself. However,
I'm interested in you contin
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 20:05:23 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> This actually tests three things: 1) table is lazily allocated, 2) default
> capacity is 16, and 3) using putAll to populate the map with 64 elements
> results in a table size of 128. This should really be broken into three
> separate test
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 17:30:48 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
> I see codes WhiteBoxResizeTest. If you wa
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 17:43:25 GMT, liach wrote:
> nitpick for the test code: for better performance, move method handle and var
> handle to static final fields so the jvm can run faster
will do it when we really migrate this test, but it should be done in another
pr when I add WeakHashMap's tabl
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 17:30:48 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> refine test
nitpick for the test code: for better perfo
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.op
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 15:46:37 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> cast several float to double before calculation
I would
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 02:27:53 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> cast several float to double before calculation
>
> OK, I took a look at HashMapsPutAllOverAllocateTableTest.java. It's cer
On Fri, 4 Mar 2022 02:27:53 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> OK, I took a look at HashMapsPutAllOverAllocateTableTest.java. It's certainly
> a good start at testing stuff in this area. However, I notice that
>
> ```
> test/jdk/java/util/HashMap/WhiteBoxResizeTest.java
> ```
>
> already exists and te
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 15:46:37 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> cast several float to double before calculation
OK, I t
On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 15:46:37 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> cast several float to double before calculation
src/jav
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:32:31 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - migrate to junit
>> - change threshold
>
> Sigh. (I'm sighing at the author of the
> Enum/ConstantDirectoryOptimalCapa
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
cast several float to double before calculation
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pul
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 18:48:46 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> revert changes to IdentityHashMap
src/java.base/share/c
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:32:31 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - migrate to junit
>> - change threshold
>
> Sigh. (I'm sighing at the author of the
> Enum/ConstantDirectoryOptimalCapa
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
revert changes to IdentityHashMap
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 01:44:24 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> I'm starting to look at this again. First, a quick note -- I don't think
> there should be any IdentityHashMap changes here. That uses a completely
> different internal structure and allocation policy, and it's kind of a
> distraction from
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 19:50:01 GMT, liach wrote:
>> @liach Hi. please have a look at the latest commit.
>> do you think it be better now?
>
> Oops, didn't notice there was this helpful `init` method. Does look much more
> straightforward now.
I'm starting to look at this again. First, a quick not
On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 06:33:05 GMT, liach wrote:
> Unfortunately I don't think there is any for now.
@liach
Yes. that is why I ask if there be evidence to show `(int) ((1 + m.size()) *
1.1)` be an optimization, but not otherwise.
(IMO it is otherwise.)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.ja
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 20:30:29 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>>> You should run benchmarks to see how bad the lookup performance degrades
>>> after you saves memory used by the hash table.
>>
>> OK, would find some time for it.
>
>> > You should run benchmarks to see how bad the lookup performance degrad
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 20:03:07 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> > You should run benchmarks to see how bad the lookup performance degrades
> > after you saves memory used by the hash table.
>
> OK, would find some time for it.
@liach which jmh test should I run by the way?
Or is there some commandline t
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 20:02:09 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> You should run benchmarks to see how bad the lookup performance degrades
> after you saves memory used by the hash table.
OK, would find some time for it.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 19:11:26 GMT, liach wrote:
> > I don't thik it reasonable. or is there eveidence it be?
>
> If this map is too dense, there may be a lot of hash collisions, and the
> lookup performance would decrease because this hashmap is linear probe than
> red-black tree buckets like t
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 19:41:22 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> In fact, if we do worry about the performance of adding from maps, calling
>> `map.forEach(this::put);` would be a better alternative both in concurrency
>> (as the concurrent map itself takes charage) and object allocation-wise (no
>> allo
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
refine IdentityHashMap
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: htt
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 19:19:16 GMT, liach wrote:
>> Imo you should just remove the `if (expectedSize == 0)` check than using
>> this somewhat ugly trick to avoid calling `size()` twice (the second call is
>> only used for this relatively useless fast-path, especially for the
>> concurrent collec
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 19:08:39 GMT, liach wrote:
>>> @liach implementations `size()` seems O1, and returns a single int number
>>> field, but it actually defers in some Map implementations.
>>
>> @liach for example, in ConcurrentSkipListMap and ConcurrentHashMap, `size()`
>> function is far com
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:44:09 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IdentityHashMap.java line 281:
>>
>>> 279: * @throws NullPointerException if the specified map is null
>>> 280: */
>>> 281: private IdentityHashMap(Map map, int
>>> expectedSize) {
>>
>> W
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:08:24 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> I don't thik it reasonable. or is there eveidence it be?
If this map is too dense, there may be a lot of hash collisions, and the lookup
performance would decrease because this hashmap is linear probe than red-black
tree buckets like the reg
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:20:27 GMT, liach wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - refine test
>> - 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that when calling ::new(Map), do not call
>> map.size() twice but once.
>>
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:38:35 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/IdentityHashMap.java line 281:
>>
>>> 279: * @throws NullPointerException if the specified map is null
>>> 280: */
>>> 281: private IdentityHashMap(Map map, int
>>> expectedSize) {
>>
>> W
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:20:27 GMT, liach wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - refine test
>> - 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that when calling ::new(Map), do not call
>> map.size() twice but once.
>>
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:08:37 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - refine test
> - 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that w
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:03:07 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
>> commits since the last revision:
>>
>> - refine test
>> - 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that when calling ::new(Map), do not call
>> map.size() twice but once.
>>
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 18:04:50 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - refine test
> - 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that w
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with three additional
commits since the last revision:
- refine test
- 1. optimize IdentityHashMap that when calling ::new(Map), do not call
map.size() twice but once.
On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 16:12:08 GMT, Andrew Haley
wrote:
> I don't think this is terribly important, but I don't like to see attempts at
> hand optimization in the standard library.
OK, we've decided use that Math.ceil() solution.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:53:43 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> revert unrelated changes and add it to ProblemList.txt
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 18:32:31 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> Sigh. (I'm sighing at the author of the
> Enum/ConstantDirectoryOptimalCapacity.java test, not you.) What a mess. See
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8282120 which I just filed. The
> broken test and the OptimalCapacity utiliti
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
revert unrelated changes and add it to ProblemList.txt
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8282120
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 15:29:25 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - migrate to junit
> - change threshold
Sigh. (I'm si
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 05:45:54 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> fix test
>
> OK, good progress. Yes, leaving ConcurrentHashMap to another PR is fine.
>
> Do the changes to Class.java an
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- migrate to junit
- change threshold
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/fi
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 11:20:12 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
> well seems jtreg cannot invoke Junit4 's parameterized test.
Nope, it can! :)
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 19:39:47 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> migrate to junit
well seems jtreg cannot invoke Junit4
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
migrate to junit
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://g
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
migrate to junit
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://g
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
migrate to junit
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://g
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 05:46:38 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> fix test
>
> test/jdk/java/util/Map/HashMapsPutAllOverAllocateTableTest.java line 2:
>
>> 1: /*
>> 2: * Copyright (c) 20
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
fix license year in test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: h
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 05:45:54 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> It's not clear to me that test is actually testing anything useful; it's just
> testing the same computation a couple different ways.
Well if I don't change it, then the test will fail.
> Do the changes to Class.java and the enum optimal
On Wed, 16 Feb 2022 19:11:53 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> fix test
OK, good progress. Yes, leaving ConcurrentHas
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 03:45:19 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
>>> The changes to j.l.Class and the EnumConstantDirectory test don't belong
>>> here -- these are _uses_ of HashMap. This bug and fix should focus on
>>> HashMap itself, to ensure that the cases in question allocate a table of
>>> the righ
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
fix test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.openj
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
fix test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.openj
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
fix test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.openj
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
fix test
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431/files
- new: https://git.openj
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional
commits since the last revision:
- revert changes in ConcurrentHashMap
- 9072610: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
---
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 18:23:51 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> 9072610: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-a
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
9072610: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.ope
On Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:58:49 GMT, XenoAmess wrote:
>> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
>
> XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> 9072610: HashMap.putAll can cause redundant space waste
> 8281631: HashMap copy constructor and putAll can over-allocate table
XenoAmess has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit
since the last revision:
9072610: HashMap.putAll can cause redundant space waste
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net
97 matches
Mail list logo
