On Sun, 8 Nov 2020 16:28:41 GMT, Alan Bateman <al...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Maurizio Cimadamore has updated the pull request with a new target base due >> to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 29 commits: >> >> - Fix post-merge issues caused by 8219014 >> - Merge branch 'master' into 8254162 >> - Addess remaining feedback from @AlanBateman and @mrserb >> - Address comments from @AlanBateman >> - Merge branch 'master' into 8254162 >> - Fix issues with derived buffers and IO operations >> - More 32-bit fixes for TestLayouts >> - * Add final to MappedByteBuffer::SCOPED_MEMORY_ACCESS field >> * Tweak TestLayouts to make it 32-bit friendly after recent MemoryLayouts >> tweaks >> - Remove TestMismatch from 32-bit problem list >> - Merge branch 'master' into 8254162 >> - ... and 19 more: >> https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/a50fdd54...02f9e251 > > Marked as reviewed by alanb (Reviewer). > I see the xxxByteAtIndex methods that took a ByteOrder have been removed from > MemoryAccess. Should the xxxByte and xxxByteAtOffset that take a ByteOrder be > removed too? I've addresses this in the latest iteration. Since I was there I also removed `getByteAtIndex` and `getByteAtIndex`, since their behavior is identical to that of `getByteAtOffset` and `setByteAtOffset`, respectively (in other words, the indexed variants are not really helpful until carrier size > 1 byte). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/548
