On Wed, 15 Mar 2023 18:10:29 GMT, Per Minborg <[email protected]> wrote:
> This PR proposes changing old-type switch statements to newer forms of switch.
Overall looks good. I've added a couple of optional comments for your
consideration.
src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/foreign/abi/CallingSequenceBuilder.java
line 208:
> 206: static boolean isUnbox(Binding binding) {
> 207: return switch (binding) {
> 208: case Binding.VMStore unused -> true;
I wonder... here it might be better to capture the box/unbox nature of a
binding in a virtual method in the binding class? E.g. isBox(), isUnbox() ?
src/java.base/share/classes/jdk/internal/foreign/abi/riscv64/linux/TypeClass.java
line 112:
> 110: return
> flatten(sequenceLayout.elementLayout()).mul(elementCount);
> 111: }
> 112: case null, default -> throw new
> IllegalStateException("Cannot get here: " + layout);
Since the default throws, and the switch w/o a `case null` also throws, do we
need the `case null` here?
-------------
Marked as reviewed by mcimadamore (Reviewer).
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13047
