On Mon, 30 Jan 2023 08:41:25 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> > java.time.ZoneOffset
>
> Maybe I am blind but can you provide a direct reference to an exising JDK
> method in `java.time` where we can apply similar optimizations?
No problem! We can start from `java.time.ZoneOffset` and its `parse` and
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 13:16:26 GMT, Andriy Plokhotnyuk wrote:
> java.time.ZoneOffset
Maybe I am blind but can you provide a direct reference to an exising JDK
method in `java.time` where we can apply similar optimizations?
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11840
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 08:30:58 GMT, Sergey Tsypanov wrote:
>>> > Do you see any concrete examples of classes in the JDK that could benefit
>>> > from a "VarHandlization"?
>>>
>>> `ImageOutputStreamImpl` and `ImageInputStreamImpl` in
>>> `javax.imageio.stream` have some very similar code that mig
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 07:43:07 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you see any concrete examples of classes in the JDK that could benefit
>>> from a "VarHandlization"?
>>
>> `ImageOutputStreamImpl` and `ImageInputStreamImpl` in
>> `javax.imageio.stream` have some very similar code that might
On Tue, 17 Jan 2023 01:08:09 GMT, j3graham wrote:
> > Do you see any concrete examples of classes in the JDK that could benefit
> > from a "VarHandlization"?
>
> `ImageOutputStreamImpl` and `ImageInputStreamImpl` in `javax.imageio.stream`
> have some very similar code that might benefit. Also
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 13:16:26 GMT, Andriy Plokhotnyuk wrote:
>
> Do you see any concrete examples of classes in the JDK that could benefit
> from a "VarHandlization"?
`ImageOutputStreamImpl` and `ImageInputStreamImpl` in `javax.imageio.stream`
have some very similar code that might benefit.
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 12:40:43 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
> > @minborg Amazing piece!
> > Will `java.lang.invoke.VarHandle` instances be shared in JDK to reuse in
> > other places?
> > The
> > [jsoniter-scala-coreJVM](https://github.com/plokhotnyuk/jsoniter-scala/tree/master/jsoniter-scala-core/jvm/s
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:49:18 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Do we need this test at all, because this code is tested to extense through
>> RandomAccessFile? We had no test before, so why add a new one here?
>>
>> Otherwise: PR looks good.
>
>> Do we need this test at all, because this code is tested
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 10:49:18 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Do we need this test at all, because this code is tested to extense through
>> RandomAccessFile? We had no test before, so why add a new one here?
>>
>> Otherwise: PR looks good.
>
>> Do we need this test at all, because this code is tested
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 09:25:40 GMT, Uwe Schindler wrote:
> Do we need this test at all, because this code is tested to extense through
> RandomAccessFile? We had no test before, so why add a new one here?
>
> Otherwise: PR looks good.
There are overlaps of the RAF and Bits tests but the latter te
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 09:01:06 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Currently, `java.io.Bits` is using explicit logic to read/write various
>> primitive types to/from byte arrays. Switching to the use of `VarHandle`
>> access would provide better performance and less code.
>>
>> Also, using a standard API
On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 09:01:06 GMT, Per Minborg wrote:
>> Currently, `java.io.Bits` is using explicit logic to read/write various
>> primitive types to/from byte arrays. Switching to the use of `VarHandle`
>> access would provide better performance and less code.
>>
>> Also, using a standard API
> Currently, `java.io.Bits` is using explicit logic to read/write various
> primitive types to/from byte arrays. Switching to the use of `VarHandle`
> access would provide better performance and less code.
>
> Also, using a standard API for these conversions means future `VarHandle`
> improvem
13 matches
Mail list logo
