Thanks Alan, thanks Martin!
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
On 03.03.2015 23:24, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 03/03/2015 18:39, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8074067/2/webrev/src/java.base/share/native/libjava/Bits.c.sdiff.html
I think you are good to go too.
-Alan
On 03/03/2015 18:39, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8074067/2/webrev/src/java.base/share/native/libjava/Bits.c.sdiff.html
I think you are good to go too.
-Alan
Looks good!
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Ivan Gerasimov
wrote:
>
>
> On 03.03.2015 12:23, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ivan Gerasimov > wrote:
>
>> Thanks Martin for the suggestion!
>>
>> On 03.03.2015 0:08, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>>
>> slightly safer (mo
On 03.03.2015 12:23, Martin Buchholz wrote:
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ivan Gerasimov
mailto:ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Thanks Martin for the suggestion!
On 03.03.2015 0:08, Martin Buchholz wrote:
slightly safer (more likely to compile everywhere) might be to
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ivan Gerasimov
wrote:
> Thanks Martin for the suggestion!
>
> On 03.03.2015 0:08, Martin Buchholz wrote:
>
> slightly safer (more likely to compile everywhere) might be to convert
> input length into a size_t immediately and to
>
> I'm not quite sure it would be
Thanks Martin for the suggestion!
On 03.03.2015 0:08, Martin Buchholz wrote:
slightly safer (more likely to compile everywhere) might be to convert
input length into a size_t immediately and to
I'm not quite sure it would be correct.
If size_t happens to be 32-bit int, then the length could o
On 02/03/2015 21:08, Martin Buchholz wrote:
slightly safer (more likely to compile everywhere) might be to convert
input length into a size_t immediately and to
#define MBYTE ((size_t) 1048576)
I'd go with that too.
-Alan
slightly safer (more likely to compile everywhere) might be to convert
input length into a size_t immediately and to
#define MBYTE ((size_t) 1048576)
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Ivan Gerasimov
wrote:
> Thank you Alan for review!
>
>
>>> As you've noted, there is no need to update xxxAddr
Thank you Alan for review!
As you've noted, there is no need to update xxxAddr because the
position is updated during swapping copy. That looks okay to me.
Only updating size for the last chunk is okay too, but that a bit of
coin toss as to whether to change this as the current code is easy
On 01/03/2015 15:20, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
Hello everyone!
Code in the file Bits.c can be made a bit shorter:
First, we can remove updating the variables which aren't used:
103 dstAddr += size;
138 srcAddr += size;
... and alike.
Second, the 'size' variable may only be updated
Hello everyone!
Code in the file Bits.c can be made a bit shorter:
First, we can remove updating the variables which aren't used:
103 dstAddr += size;
138 srcAddr += size;
... and alike.
Second, the 'size' variable may only be updated when 'length' becomes
less than MBYTE.
The
11 matches
Mail list logo
