On Thu, 15 Aug 2024 07:59:21 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this cleanup, where we rename `MEMFLAGS` to `MemType`. >> >> `MEMFLAGS` implies that we can use more than one at the same time, but those >> are exclusive values, so `MemType` is much more suitable name. >> >> There is a bunch of other related cleanup that we can do, but I will leave >> for follow up issues such as [NMT: rename NMTUtil::flag to >> NMTUtil::type](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8337836) > > The suggestion of "nmtGC" from @daholmes initially looked somewhat appealing > to me. But that then suggests "NMTType" or (better?) "NMTGroup" or something > like that. But I don't much like the look of or typing those acronyms. (Note > that NMTGroup is HotSpot style, not NmtGroup.) > > So I'm still preferring "MemType". @kimbarrett @stefank Would you like to name your nominees? As last voters you have quite weight behind your choices... | | MemType | MemTypeFlag | NMTCat | NMTGroup | NMT_MemType | NMT::MemType | | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | gerard | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | | David | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1(NMTMemType) | 2 | | Thomas | 0 | 0 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | | Johan | 0 | 0 | 2(NMTCategory) | 3 | 0 | 0 | | Afshin | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | | Stefan | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Kim | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | ? | | Coleen | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | | | 1 | 6 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 10 | ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20497#issuecomment-2315814746
