On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 07:41:39 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>>Though it might be possible to go even further and eliminate
>>>WeakProcessorPhases as a thing separate from OopStorageSet.
>>
>> This makes sense. Can we file another RFE for this? I was sort of surprised
>> by how much code was involved so I tried to find a place to stop deleting.
>
>> Ok, so I'm not sure what to do with this:
>>
>> enum Phase {
>> // Serial phase.
>> JVMTI_ONLY(jvmti)
>> // Additional implicit phase values follow for oopstorages.
>> `};`
>>
>> I've removed the only thing in this enum.
>
> Enums without any named enumerators are still meaningful types. More so with
> scoped enums, but still with unscoped enums.
> > Though it might be possible to go even further and eliminate
> > WeakProcessorPhases as a thing separate from OopStorageSet.
>
> This makes sense. Can we file another RFE for this? I was sort of surprised
> by how much code was involved so I tried to find a place to stop deleting.
I think the deletion stopped at the wrong place; it either went too far, or not
far enough.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/967
