Hi Martin!
Why did you exclude the case of zero initial capacity?
96 int initialCapacity = rnd.nextInt(1, 20);
I think it may make sense to have "static final EMPTY_DEQUE =
ArrayDeque(0);" somewhere, and we may want to make sure it doesn't
allocate more memory than needed?
It's perfectly fine to have this test:
149 assertTrue((head == tail) ^ (elements[head] != null));
though I would find it a bit easier to read if it were written as
assertEquals(head == tail, elements[head] == null);
It's a matter of style, of course.
With kind regards,
Ivan
On 7/3/18 3:15 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
OK, this thread is officially upgraded to a RFR.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/jdk/jsr166-integration/ArrayDeque-capacity/index.html
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Emartin/webrevs/jdk/jsr166-integration/ArrayDeque-capacity/index.html>
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 11:04 AM, Paul Sandoz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Jul 3, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Martin Buchholz <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Paul Sandoz
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Looks good. Where do you propose to place the test in the
OpenJDK repo?
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/jdk/jsr166-integration/overview.html
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Emartin/webrevs/jdk/jsr166-integration/overview.html>
I hadn't gotten around to a RFR - the test is slightly modified
from my initial post.
Ok, i see more thorough assertions in the assertInvariants method.
Thanks,
Paul.
--
With kind regards,
Ivan Gerasimov
