On Thu, 25 Sep 2025 17:37:34 GMT, fabioromano1 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> fabioromano1 has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional >> commit since the last revision: >> >> Comments > > Master branch results: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideL avgt 15 109800.570 ± 4612.510 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideM avgt 15 18786.818 ± 725.330 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideS avgt 15 9764.192 ± 98.841 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideXL avgt 15 976249.610 ± 194313.150 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideXS avgt 15 7782.170 ± 209.999 ns/op > ``` > > PR branch results: > > Benchmark Mode Cnt Score Error Units > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideL avgt 15 9323.939 ± 302.617 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideM avgt 15 5367.752 ± 87.323 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideS avgt 15 4514.351 ± 79.579 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideXL avgt 15 37474.101 ± 601.947 ns/op > BigDecimalDivide.testExactDivideXS avgt 15 3983.560 ± 60.067 ns/op @fabioromano1 While the main algorithm seems correct, probably during next week I'd like to take another look at the code to see whether there are other cases at the extremes of the scale range that could lead to ±1 errors in the scale, or inadvertent overflows. Are there other small enhancements to this PR you'd like to add, both in the main code and in the tests? ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27271#issuecomment-3359536382
