Hi,
On 13/02/2020 10:52, Ravi Reddy wrote:
I notice that the `break` from the original code has not been
reintroduced. I don't think that it is strictly needed, but did you give
it any consideration?
Chris , in original code since we were doing retry with direct
connection and not proceeding further with proxies by adding ‘break;’
, whereas now we are retrying with the proxy and if the connection fails
again , we have to make sure we do try with other proxies , hence I
haven’t reintroduced ‘break’ .
The break is not needed because it.hasNext() is false - but IMO it
would make the code more readable - I had to stare at the code for some
time to convince myself that it was not needed.
(where I assume we're talking about introducing a `break;` after
line 1213).
Also can you please confirm that the test fails on the jdk mainline
without your fix?
best regards,
-- daniel
