[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2191?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12467385
]
Knut Anders Hatlen commented on DERBY-2191:
-------------------------------------------
I think the rewrite of numBitsInLastByte() made the code clearer. The error
checks in the constructor and shrink() also seem useful. Two comments:
1) umul8() doesn't seem to be used.
2) I think isSet(), set() and clear() became more difficult to read. I think
it would be better if they kept the old style where the byte number and bit
position were calculated separately and put into variables with meaningful
names (they can still use the new methods).
> Cleanup of FormatableBitSet
> ---------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-2191
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-2191
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Miscellaneous
> Affects Versions: 10.2.1.6
> Reporter: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Assigned To: Dyre Tjeldvoll
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 10.3.0.0
>
> Attachments: bitops.v1.diff, bitops.v1.stat, bitops.v2.diff,
> bitops.v2.stat, bitops.v3.diff, bitopt.v1.diff, bitopt.v1.stat,
> boundarycheck.v1.diff, boundarycheck.v1.stat, cleanup2191.diff,
> cleanup2191.stat, deadcode.v1.diff, deadcode.v2.diff, fbstst.v1.diff,
> fbstst.v1.stat, FormatableBitSetTest.java, unusedmethods.v1.diff,
> unusedmethods.v1.stat, valuenotnull.v1.diff, valuenotnull.v1.stat
>
>
> The implementation of FormatableBitSet could be streamlined. Dead code can be
> removed and the implementation of some methods can be simplified.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
