On 8/10/18 6:32 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:

On 2018-08-09 18:28, Claes Redestad wrote:

On 2018-08-09 17:41, Peter Levart wrote:

There's danger when you overwrite a non-null @Stable field with another value that this new value will not be seen. Or is <clinit> code an exception where @Stable is not honored yet...

Typically IntegerCache::<clinit> runs before JIT has even started, so I think we're OK even though the double-assignment is undefined. But it's a good question what happens in cases we're running AOTd code, so perhaps this pattern might be problematic in some future..

To mitigate this possibility, you could have two fields:

static Integer cache[];
static final Integer finalCache[];

The 'cache' field is archived and de-archived. The final result is set to 'cache' by overwriting and to 'finalCache'. The later is then also used in Integer.valueOf().

Right, this would be a cheap way to dispel any concerns here.

New webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~redestad/8209120/open.01/

This looks good to me.   Similar pattern may also be applied
to empty ListN, SetN, MapN added by JDK-8207263.


Reply via email to