On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 01:44:24 GMT, Stuart Marks <sma...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I'm starting to look at this again. First, a quick note -- I don't think > there should be any IdentityHashMap changes here. That uses a completely > different internal structure and allocation policy, and it's kind of a > distraction from the main point of this change. (As the preceding chain of > comments illustrates.) > > There is a question of whether IdentityHashMap ought to "allow for some > growth" when copying a map, but it's hard to see how much of a problem this > really is. I'd suggest focusing on getting this change done, and then (if you > still have energy) to try to eradicate the `(int) (expected / 0.75) + 1` > idiom that's sprinkled around the JDK. OK, will split this part from this pr. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7431
