On Wed, 11 Feb 2026 17:39:33 GMT, Thomas Stuefe <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> The new `INCLUDE_CLASS_SPACE` changes look okay when viewed as their own >>> commit, but I think they will muddy the PR for other reviewers. >> >> I don't understand? > >> > The new `INCLUDE_CLASS_SPACE` changes look okay when viewed as their own >> > commit, but I think they will muddy the PR for other reviewers. >> >> I don't understand? > > @dholmes-ora David, I am unsure what you want me to do. Rename the macro? The > macro is an integral part of the change and will be needed as long as we > still support 32-bit. > @tstuefe all I was saying was that looking at the single commit that > contained only the INCLUDE_CLASS_SPACE change, it was very easy to see how > that change was being applied. But anyone looking at the whole PR will find > it harder to see it as clearly. This is a big PR. I agree. That is why I originally kept the `using_classspace` method around. But I don't mind the define, its better. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28366#issuecomment-3895010408
