Re: Invokedynamic and recursive method call

On 01/30/2015 01:48 AM, John Rose wrote: On Jan 7, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Remi Forax > wrote: But if fibo is called through an invokedynamic, instead of emitting a direct call to fibo, the JIT generates a code that push the method handle on stack and execute it like if t

Re: Invokedynamic and recursive method call

> On Jan 29, 2015, at 4:48 PM, John Rose wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Remi Forax > wrote: >> >> But if fibo is called through an invokedynamic, instead of emitting a direct >> call to fibo, >> the JIT generates a code that push the method handle on stack an

Re: Invokedynamic and recursive method call

On Jan 7, 2015, at 8:13 AM, Remi Forax wrote: > > But if fibo is called through an invokedynamic, instead of emitting a direct > call to fibo, > the JIT generates a code that push the method handle on stack and execute it > like if the metod handle was not constant > (the method handle is consta

Re: Invokedynamic and recursive method call

Trying to remember compiler implementation details this sounds reasonable and is a bug (or an enhancement, actually ;-). Can someone file a bug? > On Jan 7, 2015, at 10:07 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter > wrote: > > This could explain performance regressions we've seen on the > performance of heav

Re: [9] RFR (XXS): 8071788: CountingWrapper.asType() is broken

Thanks, John! Best regards, Vladimir Ivanov On 1/29/15 6:11 AM, John Rose wrote: Good. On Jan 28, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Vladimir Ivanov mailto:vladimir.x.iva...@oracle.com>> wrote: The fix is to use adapted MethodHandle to construct LambdaForm. ___

Re: [9] RFR (XS): 8071787: Don't block inlining when DONT_INLINE_THRESHOLD=0

Thanks, John! Best regards, Vladimir Ivanov On 1/29/15 6:10 AM, John Rose wrote: Good. Consider fixing the typo in 'makeBlockInlningWrapper'. — John On Jan 28, 2015, at 9:12 AM, Vladimir Ivanov wrote: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~vlivanov/8071787/webrev.00/ https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/b

Re: What's the status of / relation between "JEP 169: Value Objects" / "Value Types for Java" / "Object Layout"

Hi Daniel, thanks a lot for sharing your point of view. I haven't been aware of the fact that Project Panama is also working on similar topics (I always thought it is only about the Foreign Function Interface and the next generation JNI). In [1,2] John Rose nicely explains that new data layouts i

Re: What's the status of / relation between "JEP 169: Value Objects" / "Value Types for Java" / "Object Layout"

Question: is JEP 169 still under active development or has it been merged into the more general "Value types for Java" proposal below? It has been merged into the more general Value Types for Java proposal. The "Value types for Java" approach clearly seems to be the most general but also the m

Re: What's the status of / relation between "JEP 169: Value Objects" / "Value Types for Java" / "Object Layout"

Am 29.01.2015 12:02, schrieb Daniel Latrémolière: I just want to quickly summarize my current findings here and gently ask for feedback in case you think I've totally misunderstood something. Of course any comments and additional information is highly welcome as well. I don't know if that can

Re: What's the status of / relation between "JEP 169: Value Objects" / "Value Types for Java" / "Object Layout"

I just want to quickly summarize my current findings here and gently ask for feedback in case you think I've totally misunderstood something. Of course any comments and additional information is highly welcome as well. I don't know if that can be useful, but here is my point of view of develope