On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:48:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Viktor Klang has refreshed the contents of this pull request, and previous
>> commits have been removed. Incremental views are not available.
>
> That's a nice find, looks good. (Update the year in the copyright header.)
@PaulSandoz Ready
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:48:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Write the initial value of the next reference without using the VarHandle
>
> That's a nice find, looks good. (Update th
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 16:48:27 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Write the initial value of the next reference without using the VarHandle
>
> That's a nice find, looks good. (Update th
On Sat, 18 Feb 2023 02:40:01 GMT, ExE Boss wrote:
>> Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Write the initial value of the next reference without using the VarHandle
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/stream/
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 11:39:21 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> I noticed when looking at the code that there was no real need to use a CHM
>> to perform the tracking of activation in an ordered fashion on
>> ForEachOrderedTask, but instead a VarHandle can be used, reducing
>> allocations and indirec
On Fri, 17 Feb 2023 11:39:21 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
>> I noticed when looking at the code that there was no real need to use a CHM
>> to perform the tracking of activation in an ordered fashion on
>> ForEachOrderedTask, but instead a VarHandle can be used, reducing
>> allocations and indirec
On Thu, 16 Feb 2023 22:01:01 GMT, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>> @PaulSandoz I'm usually a bit weary of piggybacking if it is not done on the
>> same object, as future reorderings of the code might break that assumption.
>> I wouldn't want to break anything silently so I made a rather conservative
>> c
> I noticed when looking at the code that there was no real need to use a CHM
> to perform the tracking of activation in an ordered fashion on
> ForEachOrderedTask, but instead a VarHandle can be used, reducing allocations
> and indirection.
Viktor Klang has updated the pull request incremental
