On Wed, 6 Aug 2025 05:24:41 GMT, Shaojin Wen <s...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Volkan Yazici has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes >> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 31 additional >> commits since the last revision: >> >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into strIntrinCheck >> - Replace `requireNonNull` with implicit null checks to reduce bytecode size >> - Add `@bug` tags >> - Improve wording of `@param len` >> - Make source array bound checks lenient too >> - Cap destination array bounds >> - Fix bit shifting >> - Remove superseded `@throws` Javadoc >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into strIntrinCheck >> - Make `StringCoding` encoding intrinsics lenient >> - ... and 21 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/565028e3...c322f0e0 > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/StringCoding.java line 99: > >> 97: * {@linkplain Preconditions#checkFromIndexSize(int, int, >> int, BiFunction) out of bounds} >> 98: */ >> 99: static int countPositives(byte[] ba, int off, int len) { > > If we name countPositives with parameter checking as countPositivesSB, this > PR will have fewer changes. I presume you mean we would not need to touch `vmIntrinsics.hpp` and such. I discussed this with @cl4es, and we decided to keep the _"`foo` for method, and `foo0` for intrinsic candidate"_ convention, since this matches the existing one. Unless more experienced maintainers tell do to otherwise, I will stick to the current style. @wenshao, nevertheless, thanks so much for your kind review(s). Please keep them coming. 🙇 ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25998#discussion_r2266851757
