If that's the only consideration then just use 0x300 instead, which is
easier to read *and* makes more sense anyway, in the context of the test.
On 09/12/2013 10:13 PM, Dmitry Nadezhin wrote:
Should we change conservative constant 1100 to optimal constant 768 ?
My opinion is no (in JDK7), because the constant 1100 has lower cost of
review.
I mean that chances that a reviewer approves 1100 are higher than chances
that [s]he approves 768.
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Brian Burkhalter <
brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> wrote:
On Sep 12, 2013, at 1:00 PM, David Chase wrote:
On 2013-09-12, at 1:17 AM, Dmitry Nadezhin <dmitry.nadez...@gmail.com>
wrote:
The optimal constant for double conversion could be 768 ,
the optimal constant for float conversion could be 142,
but I leave this optimization to JDK 9.
It would be helpful to mention in the proof/comment, that 768 refers to the
decimal representation that has had leading zeroes between decimal point
and mantissa trimmed.
I updated the webrev to include a comment for MAX_NDIGITS sans both
hyperlink and the foregoing verbiage:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8024356/
If there is any more tweaking of comments which needs to be effected prior
to an approval request being posted to 7u-dev, please let me know.
Thanks,
Brian
--
- DML
