Hi Dan,
> De: "daniel smith"
> À: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Novembre 2017 18:24:22
> Objet: Re: Design notes for next values iteration
>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 9:42 AM, [ mailto:fo...@univ-mlv.fr | fo
> On Nov 22, 2017, at 9:42 AM, fo...@univ-mlv.fr wrote:
>
>
>
> - Mail original -
>> De: "daniel smith"
>> À: "Remi Forax"
>> Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts"
>> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Novembre 2017 16:32:36
>> Obj
la-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Novembre 2017 10:42:36
> Objet: Re: Design notes for next values iteration
> Interesting !
> here is my current view of the problem.
>
> Lets say we are in the R/Q/U world, we want U interface to abstract over a
> reference type or a value
- Mail original -
> De: "daniel smith"
> À: "Remi Forax"
> Cc: "valhalla-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Novembre 2017 16:32:36
> Objet: Re: Design notes for next values iteration
>> On Nov 22, 2017, at 2:42 AM, Remi Forax wr
> On Nov 22, 2017, at 4:46 AM, Maurizio Cimadamore
> wrote:
>
> One thing that struck me as inconsistent is that we are enhancing almost all
> a- bytecodes to work with value types as well as reference types. But acmp is
> weird, as it always return false for values. I think I get where that i
> On Nov 22, 2017, at 2:42 AM, Remi Forax wrote:
>
> I think we do not need Q types, Q types are use site annotations, and here we
> want declaration site annotations (let say that this class is a value class,
> the ACC_VALUE).
>
> If we have no Q type, it means that R types and U types are th
great writeup - I like where this is going (although I'm a but afraid of
"value invasions", as we're essentially redefining semantics of existing
classfiles).
One thing that struck me as inconsistent is that we are enhancing almost
all a- bytecodes to work with value types as well as reference
smith"
> À: "valhalla-spec-experts"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 22 Novembre 2017 06:54:55
> Objet: Design notes for next values iteration
> Following up on John's mail, here are some detailed notes about the design
> choices for "U types", and the concrete p
Following up on John's mail, here are some detailed notes about the design
choices for "U types", and the concrete proposal we settled on last week.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dlsmith/values-notes.html
John may have raised additional points I didn't cover in this document. I'll do
another revi
