On Thu, 16 Oct 2025 11:27:41 GMT, Daniel Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I'm not able to follow. `UncheckedIOE` is peeled off by >> `Utils::toIOException` in `translateSendAsyncExecFailure()`. Mind >> elaborating on what are you suggesting? > > Although it might look strange - we might want to wrap the > UncheckedIOException instead of peeling it off. > If the UncheckedIOException is generated by us (HttpClient implementation) > then we most likely want to peel it off. But if it originates from custom > code, peeling it off might hide important stack trace information. > I am actually hesitating between the two possibilities. > > We see here that peeling of the UncheckedIOException from within sendAsync > forces you to modify one test, where the UncheckedIOException was originating > from custom code. I am not 100% sure we want do that. > > On the other hand - we don't want to add yet another version of toIOException. > > Let me think about this a bit more. OK - I think what you have is fine. Let's peel of UncheckedIOException. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27787#discussion_r2435573867
