harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Zhang" <zhanghuang...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Solution on Harmony-815 (was Re: [jira] Commented: (HARMONY-815) [classlib][nio] Refine implConfigureBlocking(boolean) method of DatagramChannel and SocketChannel.)
Date Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:52:09 GMT
Seems most people prefer subclass to SocketException with ErrorCodeException
cause.

Does anyone prefer the latter? or both are acceptable?

I think we'd better made an agreement about this issue.

Mikhail, how do you think about it? Which one do you prefer? :) I'll fix
Harmony-815 once decision is made.

Thanks!


On 7/18/06, Alexey Varlamov <alexey.v.varlamov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> IMHO, throwing a subclass certainly fits to specification and can
> hardly break compatibility with RI. I consider this is the proper
> workaround for now.
> Just my $0.02 :)
>
> --
> Alexey Varlamov
> >
> > In this case, I guess if we set the cause to null when catching the
> > SocketException will properly solve the problem. However it seems
> > difficult as Throwable.initCause() can be called only once.
> >
> > If throwing a subclass may also break compatibility guideline, I still
> > suggest return value, though it may break the current
> > infrastructure(currently, all errors throw exception), it is still easy
> > to deal with, only some of operation, read/write, require a little
> > change, and we no longer need "try...catch" in Java code
> >
> > BTW, I find the code shall also deal with InterruptIOException.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Andrew Zhang
China Software Development Lab, IBM

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message