> On 16 Jan 2020, at 12:10, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
> On 16/01/2020 11:45, Chris Hegarty wrote:
>> :
>> Generally, I agree with updating the socket adapter to support
>> multicast. It will certainly help with future work in this area.
>>
>> The instanceof checks in the constructors highlight tha
On 16/01/2020 11:45, Chris Hegarty wrote:
:
Generally, I agree with updating the socket adapter to support
multicast. It will certainly help with future work in this area.
The instanceof checks in the constructors highlight that there is an
abstraction missing here - to support creating a custom
> On 14 Jan 2020, at 19:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
>
> ...
> Here's the updated webrev that changes oldImpl to be final.
>http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8236925/2/webrev/
Generally, I agree with updating the socket adapter to support
multicast. It will certainly help with future work in t
Looks good Alan!
best regards.
-- daniel
On 14/01/20 19:23, Alan Bateman wrote:
Thanks for going through this. I tried to keep the changes to
DatagramSocket to a minimum but I don't mind making an exception for
oldImpl. It's a slippery slope as there is a lot of technical debt in
this area.
On 14/01/2020 17:49, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
Hi Alan,
Globally this looks good to me. One small nit is that the `oldImpl`
field could now also become final (by applying the same trick you
did with createImpl - that is - have oldImpl() return a boolean
rather than set the field and assign the result
Hi Alan,
Globally this looks good to me. One small nit is that the `oldImpl`
field could now also become final (by applying the same trick you
did with createImpl - that is - have oldImpl() return a boolean
rather than set the field and assign the result in the constructor.
I've imported your pa
