On Tue, 11 May 2021 06:35:43 GMT, Mitsuru Kariya
wrote:
>> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
>> upper 32 bits of the long value.
>> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
>
> Mitsuru Kariya has updated the pull r
On Thu, 15 Apr 2021 15:44:15 GMT, Mitsuru Kariya
wrote:
> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
> upper 32 bits of the long value.
> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: a
On Tue, 11 May 2021 06:35:43 GMT, Mitsuru Kariya
wrote:
>> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
>> upper 32 bits of the long value.
>> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
>
> Mitsuru Kariya has updated the pull r
On Mon, 10 May 2021 23:15:29 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> I don't think you need to.
Sure.
> Some of the more recently changed files need updates to the Oracle copyrights.
I'm sorry for the stupid mistake.
I just updated the copyright.
> Note I'm only requesting updates to the Oracle copyrig
> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
> upper 32 bits of the long value.
> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
Mitsuru kariya has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Up
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:41:20 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
>> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
>> upper 32 bits of the long value.
>> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
>
> @kariya-mitsuru Please enable github actions on your jdk personal fork
On Sun, 2 May 2021 16:07:26 GMT, Mitsuru kariya
wrote:
>> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
>> upper 32 bits of the long value.
>> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
>
> Mitsuru kariya has updated the pull r
On Sun, 2 May 2021 16:07:26 GMT, Mitsuru kariya
wrote:
>> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
>> upper 32 bits of the long value.
>> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
>
> Mitsuru kariya has updated the pull r
> The current `hashCode` implementation of SA's Address subclasses ignores the
> upper 32 bits of the long value.
> This PR changes to use `Long.hashCode` instead.
Mitsuru kariya has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Add
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:36:59 GMT, Kevin Walls wrote:
> If you have time, these could all use the same change?
I have enough time to change them.
May I mix that fix into this pull request?
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:41:20 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Please enable github actions on your jdk personal fork to enable the
> pre-submit testing.
I've changed the settings.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522
On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 22:23:17 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Also, please give a proper description of the PR. Right now it just says
> "…tation"
Oh, I'm embarrassed to say that I completely overlooked this.
I just updated the description.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3
On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 22:22:38 GMT, Chris Plummer wrote:
> Please update all copyright dates to 2021.
Thank you for your advice.
I just updated the copyright.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522
> …tation
Mitsuru kariya has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Update copyright
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522/files/5f671
…tation
-
Commit messages:
- 8264734: SA's Address subclasses could use better hashCode() implementation
Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/3522/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=jdk&pr=3522&range=00
Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8
Thank you for your consideration.
I would like to send a pull request soon.
Thanks
On 2021-04-06 06:17, Chris Plummer wrote:
[moving to serviceability-dev]
Hi,
I'm not sure if Address hashcodes are even used by SA, and if they
are, I doubt this slightly improved hash would make a noticeable
d
Thank you for your advice.
I subscribed serviceability-dev mailing list.
2021-04-04 19:50 に Pavel Rappo さんは書きました:
A better place for this email might be the serviceability-dev mailing
list (CC'ed).
On 4 Apr 2021, at 09:31, kariyam wrote:
Hi,
I found that sun.jvm.hotspot.debugger.*.*Addres
17 matches
Mail list logo
