On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 18:08, David Holmes <david.hol...@oracle.com> wrote: > I think there has been some confusion here. It seems to me that the > anti-inlining that is being referred to is javac's "inlining" of > compile-time constants - BUT that doesn't apply to reference types other > than String, so it seems to me that the current code contortions serve no > useful purpose and direct initialization to null could have been used.
I was actually afraid of what the VM would do, not javac. I freely admit to a bit of superstition. Surely there must have been a time when the anti-inlining was effective? Anyways, with two votes for making the code sane, I'll go along and simply initialize to null. http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/TimeTravel/ If there's a problem with setOut, we'll surely find out before this jdk goes into production. Martin > There is a second memory-model issue concerning these fields but basically > that requires that no code gets compiled and caches the initial null values > of these fields, prior to the setXX methods being called to initialize them > correctly. I don't see how the use of the current code would change that one > way or another though, so again the current code seems to serve no purpose. > > Did I miss something? > > David Holmes
