On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 20:18:34 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > Thanks for reviewing, Kim. Is your suggestion to not have a JVMFlag object > > for develop flags in PRODUCT builds? Presumably to save some footprint? I'm > > not sure we would win fighting the macros to accomplish this. > > Yes, that's the suggestion and the rationale for it. It should also remove > the need for is_constant_in_binary. I don't know how hard it would actually > be to accomplish this. I agree it might not be worth the effort, but we won't > know until someone looks, which I haven't done. It might even be easy. Currently the VM prints an error message for non-product flags, so we need to keep some information about them. We can probably skip the type information, etc, to save a little space, but the space saving would be minimal. $ java -XX:+LoomDeoptAfterThaw --version Error: VM option 'LoomDeoptAfterThaw' is develop and is available only in debug version of VM. Improperly specified VM option 'LoomDeoptAfterThaw' Error: Could not create the Java Virtual Machine. Error: A fatal exception has occurred. Program will exit. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18541#issuecomment-2033183718
