On Wed, 28 Jan 2026 16:42:47 GMT, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> We will still need to create T_FLOAT16 basic type and associate it with 
>>> Float16 LaneType, why not directly pass these basic types to intrinsic 
>>> entry point ?
>> 
>> The strong feedback from HotSpot folks, which i agree with, is adding a new 
>> enum value to `BasicType` is not the way to go - it is too disruptive and 
>> does not scale. Sorry if i misled you earlier on, it was my intention in 
>> feedback to propose something that was limited in scope to vector support.
>> 
>> The thought about a proxy class was motivated by a question i had - what 
>> would we do if `Float16.class` was already present in `java.base`? and 
>> answers to that might motivate what we do now in preparation for when that 
>> happens. Regardless i think we need to separate out the Vector API's direct 
>> dependence on BasicType and its values. Instead we should define our own 
>> constants for the vector element types, and provide mapping of those to 
>> BasicType values which might result in "erasure" to the carrier type. We 
>> should adjust/adapt LaneType accordingly. Does that make sense to you?
>
>> Hi @PaulSandoz , Yes this looks good to me, I have modified the patch 
>> accordingly.
> 
> Thanks, i think this is much better, more localized.

Hi @PaulSandoz , I have addressed your comment.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28002#issuecomment-4396175864

Reply via email to