Code Review Request: 7035556 DatagramSocket.java:183: warning: unreachable catch clause (original) (raw)

Chris Hegarty chris.hegarty at oracle.com
Mon Jul 25 01:24:08 PDT 2011

The changes look fine to me. Thanks for taking care of this one.

-Chris.

On 07/22/11 06:31 PM, Kurchi Hazra wrote:

Hi, I changed the implementation according to Brad's comments. I am reposting the output of hg diff src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java since I don't have an openjdk account: bash-3.00$ hg diff src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java diff --git a/src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java b/src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java --- a/src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java +++ b/src/share/classes/java/net/DatagramSocket.java @@ -176,13 +176,7 @@ class DatagramSocket implements java.io. public DatagramSocket() throws SocketException { // create a datagram socket. createImpl(); - try { - bind(new InetSocketAddress(0)); - } catch (SocketException se) { - throw se; - } catch(IOException e) { - throw new SocketException(e.getMessage()); - } + bind(new InetSocketAddress(0)); }

Thanks, Kurchi

On 7/22/2011 7:25 AM, Michael McMahon wrote: On 22/07/11 14:55, Alan Bateman wrote: Michael McMahon wrote: But, bind() already closes the impl internally before throwing the exception. I was wondering about that and whether this is a bug. Suppose someone creates an unbound DatagramSocket and then attempts to bind it to a port. If the bind fails (say port already in use) then it may be surprising that they can't retry with a different port. Should this be specified? I see there are cases such as the security exception where it doesn't the close the impl.

-Alan. It doesn't seem to be specified either way, though it does seem to be inconsistent. I'd be wary about changing the behaviour though unless there was a strong justification (more than a compiler warning :) ) - Michael.

More information about the net-dev mailing list