On Mon, 8 Dec 2025 23:29:33 GMT, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Okay, I got your point. I think this might be to maintain consistency with >> `UMINReduceMasked`; for the masked version, if no element is selected, it >> returns the identity value. I'm okay with both approaches, maybe let’s hear >> what @PaulSandoz thinks. > > For masking we need to start with the identity or otherwise use the identify > when no mask bits are set. It would be better to declare as constants and > refer to them e.g., `UMAX_VALUE`, `UMIN_VALUE`. There are also other cases > where we use identity values for reduction and they follow the same pattern > of declaration and use. Okay, I understand, thank you for your insight! I'll wait for @PaulSandoz 's comment and see if we should add two **public** constants to this PR. Then I'll modify it accordingly. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28692#discussion_r2601593342
