On Tue, 2 Dec 2025 09:29:13 GMT, Tobias Hartmann <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think it might not be doable indeed. >> >> There is still the question of `"enable-valhalla", "true"` or >> `"enable-preview", "true"`. While the first version was to do an >> `enable-preview` (up to the difficulties of testing it...), after discussion >> with @TobiHartmann, `enable-valhalla` had upsides, which I fear I don't >> remember. >> >> If we change the name to `enable-preview`, the way we check it might be... >> confusing, but fine for now. Also, the current solution makes it easier to >> update tests in the future when Valhalla won't be preview anymore. > > I think `enable-valhalla` is good for now. `PreviewFeatures.isEnabled()` can > not be used from within the IR framework and `enable-preview` is not really > what we are checking (we are checking if boxing classes were migrated, which > is Valhalla specific). We can still rename the flag if needed later. If the current solution makes it easier to update post-preview I'm all for it! ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/1767#discussion_r2580358136
