On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 11:05:48 GMT, Emanuel Peter <epe...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> > Oh I think we still cannot use `BoolTest::negate`, because we cannot > > instantiate a `BoolTest` object with **unsigned** comparison. > > `BoolTest::negate` is a non-static function. > > I see. Ok. Hmm. I still think that the logic should be in `BoolTest`, because > that is where the exact implementation of the enum values is. In that context > it is easier to see why `^4` does the negation. And imagine we were ever to > change the enum values, then it would be harder to find your code and fix it. > > Maybe it could be called `BoolTest::negate_mask(mast btm)` and explain in a > comment that both signed and unsigned is supported. Make sense, I'll update later, thanks. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24674#issuecomment-2948297917
