-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.2k
8357178: Simplify Class::componentType #25280
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
👋 Welcome back liach! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
|
@liach This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be: You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 117 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details. ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
Webrevs
|
| @Override | ||
| public Class<?> componentType() { | ||
| return isArray() ? componentType : null; | ||
| return componentType; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you consider calling getComponentType(), which already returns the field?
Are there regression tests for Class::componentType()/Class::getComponentType() somewhere? I didn't see them in the obvious test/jdk/java/lang/Class directory.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you consider calling getComponentType(), which already returns the field?
I don't think we want an extra indirection here - The logic here is quite simple. Counterargument could be that MethodType::descriptorString calls toMethodDescriptorString, except these methods involve more complex caching and is not simple like this field access.
Are there regression tests for Class::componentType()/Class::getComponentType() somewhere? I didn't see them in the obvious test/jdk/java/lang/Class directory.
They are located in test/jdk/java/lang/constant/TypeDescriptorTest.java.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you consider calling getComponentType(), which already returns the field?
I don't think we want an extra indirection here - The logic here is quite simple. Counterargument could be that
MethodType::descriptorStringcallstoMethodDescriptorString, except these methods involve more complex caching and is not simple like this field access.
My mental model anyway is that this trivial inline would be something the VM would do readily.
|
Question: Why was this overload added in the first place, as it seems equivalent to |
|
@minborg It implements a method in TypeDescriptor.OfField. |
|
Can anyone review this simple cleanup? |
RogerRiggs
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
|
Thanks for the reviews! /integrate |
|
Going to push as commit 070c84c.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
isArrayand null return is now redundant whencomponentTypeis changed to an explicit field.Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
gitCheckout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25280/head:pull/25280$ git checkout pull/25280Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/25280$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/25280/headUsing Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 25280View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 25280Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25280.diff
Using Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment