(original) (raw)

private static final ByteOrder byteOrder  
 571 = unsafe.isBigEndian() ? ByteOrder.BIG\_ENDIAN : ByteOrder.LITTLE\_ENDIAN;  
 572   
 573 static ByteOrder byteOrder() {  
 574 if (byteOrder == null)  
 575 throw new Error("Unknown byte order");  
 576 return byteOrder;  
 577 }  
 578 

No need for null check in byteOrder() anymore, right?

On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Andrew Haley <aph@redhat.com> wrote:

On 03/11/2015 07:10 AM, John Rose wrote:
\>>
\>> John: I'm waiting for an answer to my question here before I submit
\>> a webrev for approval.
\>>
\>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/panama-dev/2015-March/000099.html
\>
\> (Answered.)

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/\~aph/unaligned.jdk.5/
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/\~aph/unaligned.hotspot.5/

I hope everybody is happy with this, or at least not so unhappy that
they would want to reject it altogether.

There is no bug ID for this yet. John, would you like to create a bug
database entry? If not, I'll do so. Then I can go for a RFR, which
hopefully should be a shoo-in now that we've beaten this thing to
death. :-)

Andrew.