On Thu, 16 Dec 2021 01:01:33 GMT, Paul Sandoz <psan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Inside the constructor would not work, since we do not construct RecursiveOp
>> for all the tasks. However, I have incremented the parameter depth. I don't
>> like changing parameters inside methods, but since I'm doing it where it is
>> being used, I feel that the code is now better than before. Thanks for the
>> suggestion.
>
> I am confused by "we do not construct RecursiveOp for all the tasks", since
> each call to `RecursiveOp.multiply/square` constructs a new object that is an
> instance of `RecursiveOp`.
>
> Your approach looks good.
var v0_task = RecursiveOp.multiply(a0, b0, parallel, depth); // Here we make a
new RecursiveOp for the multiply
da1 = a2.add(a0);
db1 = b2.add(b0);
var vm1_task = RecursiveOp.multiply(da1.subtract(a1), db1.subtract(b1),
parallel, depth); // Here also
da1 = da1.add(a1);
db1 = db1.add(b1);
var v1_task = RecursiveOp.multiply(da1, db1, parallel, depth); // And
here
v2 = da1.add(a2).shiftLeft(1).subtract(a0).multiply( // Here we call
multiply() directly, without the RecursiveOp
db1.add(b2).shiftLeft(1).subtract(b0), true, parallel, depth);
vinf = a2.multiply(b2, true, parallel, depth); // Again, we call
multiply() directly
v0 = v0_task.join();
vm1 = vm1_task.join();
v1 = v1_task.join();
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6409
