RFR 8014076: Arrays parallel and serial sorting improvements (original) (raw)

Chris Hegarty chris.hegarty at oracle.com
Thu May 9 09:47:28 UTC 2013

On 05/09/2013 10:45 AM, David Holmes wrote:

....

Good point Mike. I guess the same argument could be made for putting any value in the implementation detail. Any objection to completely removing any reference to this? The compile-time constant issue is easily fixed by using an initialization function. I think it is important for users to know what the sequential sorting threshold is.

I don't understand why this is important. Is the general advise not, always use parallelSort unless there is a good reason not to?

-Chris

David -----

-Chris

Mike

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list