On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 18:33:34 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadam...@openjdk.org>
wrote:
>> This PR proposes changing old-type switch statements to newer forms of
>> switch.
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/foreign/abi/CallingSequenceBuilder.java
> line 208:
>
>> 206: static boolean isUnbox(Binding binding) {
>> 207: return switch (binding) {
>> 208: case Binding.VMStore unused -> true;
>
> I wonder... here it might be better to capture the box/unbox nature of a
> binding in a virtual method in the binding class? E.g. isBox(), isUnbox() ?
I prefer this approach, to be honest, since the logic for all the different
binding operators is in one place. It gives an overview of which operators are
expected in an unboxing recipe. Making them virtual methods would put quite a
bit of visual distance between the different `true`/`false` values.
I've been through the Binding file quite a bit, and the amount of
scrolling/searching needed to find a particular implementation is kind of
annoying.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13047
