On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 09:20:57 GMT, Marc Chevalier <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Right, adding it to every test doesn't feel like the way to go! I'm not too >> fussed about it, it was just a suggestion, feel free to disregard ;) > > I think it might not be doable indeed. > > There is still the question of `"enable-valhalla", "true"` or > `"enable-preview", "true"`. While the first version was to do an > `enable-preview` (up to the difficulties of testing it...), after discussion > with @TobiHartmann, `enable-valhalla` had upsides, which I fear I don't > remember. > > If we change the name to `enable-preview`, the way we check it might be... > confusing, but fine for now. Also, the current solution makes it easier to > update tests in the future when Valhalla won't be preview anymore. I think `enable-valhalla` is good for now. `PreviewFeatures.isEnabled()` can not be used from within the IR framework and `enable-preview` is not really what we are checking (we are checking if boxing classes were migrated, which is Valhalla specific). We can still rename the flag if needed later. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1767#discussion_r2580357275
