On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:52:23 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> As this stands (modulo my other comments) this change is mostly OK. Using
>> the SOFT_MAX value within java.base is fine. Using SOFT_MAX within
>> java.base-related tests is a little suspicious, because it requires the
>> addition of di
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 05:39:09 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
>> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH`
>> when referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit.
>> Currentl
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 04:01:09 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> As this stands (modulo my other comments) this change is mostly OK. Using the
> SOFT_MAX value within java.base is fine. Using SOFT_MAX within
> java.base-related tests is a little suspicious, because it requires the
> addition of directiv
On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 03:38:26 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote:
> The comment is a bit misleading. I'm not sure any comment is warranted, as
> you had observed, there's a big description next to SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH.
> I'm also not sure a new local variable maxArrayLength adds anything.
Thanks, I have r
> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH` when
> referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit. Currently,
> instances of `Integer.MAX_VALUE - 8` are found across the
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:14:31 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH` when
> referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit. Currently,
>
On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:14:31 GMT, Eirik Bjørsnøs wrote:
> Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
> consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH` when
> referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit. Currently,
>
Please review this cleanup PR which updates code and tests in `java.base` to
consistently use `jdk.internal.util.ArraySupport.SOFT_MAX_ARRAY_LENGTH` when
referring to the JVM's maximum array size implementation limit. Currently,
instances of `Integer.MAX_VALUE - 8` are found across the code bas
11 matches
Mail list logo
