On Fri, 6 Jun 2025 07:01:58 GMT, erifan <d...@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.
@eme64 your comment is addressed, thanks for your suggestion! ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/24674#issuecomment-2948832452
