Thanks Chris for your review!
This looks much better. Trivially I’d calculate the initial size like:
510 / 0.75 + 1.0f ( plus 1 )
I'll all +1 for extra accuracy.
… but your regression test should prove that the plus one is not
needed.
Maybe a comment that the 0.75 is the default load factor from HashMap.
Sure, I'll a comment too.
The constant could be removed and the ‘510’ be used directly in the
test. Since the test is whitebox.
The test is fine, but could be a little less obscure if it looked at
the table size, rather than the equality. But what you have is fine.
I'd rather leave the named constant, as it seems just a bit less
error-prone to me.
I guess, this new test should not bring attention too often.
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
-Chris.
Comments, suggestions are welcome!
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Ivan Gerasimov
<ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com <mailto:ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com>
<mailto:ivan.gerasi...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hello!
When constructing the map, the expected size is specified to be
256, but then 510 elements are inserted.
A new whitebox test is provided, so the next time the number of
entries grows, the expected size will not be forgotten.
Would you please help review this fix?
BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8080535
WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/8080535/00/webrev/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8080535/00/webrev/>
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Eigerasim/8080535/00/webrev/>
Sincerely yours,
Ivan
