RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken) (original) (raw)
Edward Nevill edward.nevill at gmail.com
Mon Mar 12 20:49:53 UTC 2018
- Previous message: RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken)
- Next message: RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Mon, 2018-03-12 at 19:54 +0000, Thomas Stüfe wrote:
Hi Edward,
Thanks a lot for the fixing work! However, I am not so sure about the change to debug.hpp. Is the point of the Static assert thing not The missing Specialization? In which case the compile error you saw there was a static assert firing... I may be wrong, maybe Erik could clarify? Otherwise the change looks good. Thank you.
Yes, of course, I see the purpose of the STATIC_ASSERT now. Kind of obvious from the name.
The failure is in
template <DecoratorSet decorators, typename T> static void verify_types(){ // If this fails to compile, then you have sent in something that is // not recognized as a valid primitive type to a primitive Access function. STATIC_ASSERT((HasDecorator<decorators, INTERNAL_VALUE_IS_OOP>::value || // oops have already been validated (IsPointer::value || IsIntegral::value) || IsFloatingPoint::value)); // not allowed primitive type }
and the error is
/home/ed/openjdk/hs/src/hotspot/share/oops/access.inline.hpp: In instantiation of ‘void AccessInternal::verify_types() [with long unsigned int decorators = 4096; T = volatile oop]’:
I will continue too look at this but would appreciate some help.
Thanks, Ed.
- Previous message: RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken)
- Next message: RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken after 8195103 and 8191102 (was RFR: 8199220: Zero build broken)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]