On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 07:54:43 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
>> pointer constant in prims code.
>>
>> Testing: mach5 tier1
>
> Okay - looks good. Thanks.
Thanks for reviews @dholmes-ora , @shipilev , @TheShermanTanker , and @ss
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:12:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
> pointer constant in prims code.
>
> Testing: mach5 tier1
Looks good. Thank you for fixing this!
The `ResultType ret{};` syntax is a little bit unusual but I'm okay wi
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:19:59 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> All right, this looks fine. (I am somewhat allergic to `{}` syntax, but it is
> what it is.)
The hoops one had to go through to get guaranteed value-initialization before
we had brace initialization are really
not pretty. See
https://
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:51:37 GMT, Julian Waters wrote:
>> Now that we have, and are using, `[[noreturn]]` on all platforms, we no
>> longer need that dead code.
>
> I'll admit, I do prefer having a return to end all possible control flows in
> a non void method, but oh well
I would rather it n
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 06:54:10 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/methodHandles.cpp line 439:
>>
>>> 437: default:
>>> 438: fatal("unexpected intrinsic id: %d %s", vmIntrinsics::as_int(iid),
>>> vmIntrinsics::name_at(iid));
>>> 439: return 0;
>>
>> Do we no longer need
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:12:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
> pointer constant in prims code.
>
> Testing: mach5 tier1
Looks Good!
-
Marked as reviewed by jwaters (Committer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jd
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:12:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
> pointer constant in prims code.
>
> Testing: mach5 tier1
All right, this looks fine. (I am somewhat allergic to `{}` syntax, but it is
what it is.)
-
M
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 07:16:21 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> This is value-initialization syntax. Value-initialization of a primitive
>> type is zero-initialization.
>>
>> However, I think we don't need the local variable at all. Here and in the
>> other 5(?) similar places, rather than
>>
>>
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:12:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
> pointer constant in prims code.
>
> Testing: mach5 tier1
Okay - looks good. Thanks.
-
Marked as reviewed by dholmes (Reviewer).
PR Review: https://git.
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 06:54:04 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
>> src/hotspot/share/prims/jni.cpp line 1151:
>>
>>> 1149: \
>>> 1150: EntryProbe; \
>>> 1151: ResultType ret{}; \
>>
>> This looks bogus. ResultType is just a macro variable and could be a
>> primitive type. ?? Does the local need initi
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 05:27:37 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
>> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
>> pointer constant in prims code.
>>
>> Testing: mach5 tier1
>
> src/hotspot/share/prims/jni.cpp line 1151:
>
>> 1149: \
>> 1150: EntryProbe; \
>> 1151: ResultTy
On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 04:12:33 GMT, Kim Barrett wrote:
> Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
> pointer constant in prims code.
>
> Testing: mach5 tier1
Couple of queries on this one.
Thanks
src/hotspot/share/prims/jni.cpp line 1151:
> 1149: \
> 1150: Entry
Please review this change that removes some uses of literal 0 as a null
pointer constant in prims code.
Testing: mach5 tier1
-
Commit messages:
- fix warnings in prims
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20385/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=20385&ran
13 matches
Mail list logo
