Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of a
few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to specify
the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
This is merely a doc update and doesn't change the implementation.
Gi
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 07:51:59 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of a
> few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>
> This
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 08:22:20 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of
>> a few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
>> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>>
>>
> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of a
> few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>
> This is merely a doc update and doesn't change the implement
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 08:24:33 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/ServerSocket.java line 521:
>>
>>> 519: *
>>> 520: * @throws IOException if an I/O error occurs when waiting
>>> for a
>>> 521: * connection, or if the socket isn't bo
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 08:21:19 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Jaikiran Pai has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Alan's suggestion - is not instead of isn't and closed instead of already
>> closed
>
> test/jdk/java/net/Socket/Socke
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 10:11:43 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> I had looked around in the test/jdk/java/net/Socket and
> test/jdk/java/net/ServerSocket tests to see if this is already tested. But I
> can't see anything that does this specific testing. I now decided to do a
> local change to the sourc
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 10:05:00 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Also "already closed" might be a bit inconsistent with the existing API docs
>> too, can you check as I think we use "is closed" in most places.
>
> Hello Alan, I've now updated the PR to address this text.
Thanks, I can review the CSR w
> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of a
> few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>
> This is merely a doc update and doesn't change the implement
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 11:06:04 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> I had looked around in the test/jdk/java/net/Socket and
>> test/jdk/java/net/ServerSocket tests to see if this is already tested. But I
>> can't see anything that does this specific testing. I now decided to do a
>> local change to the s
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 14:20:48 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
>> comments? The new docs are hosted
>> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>>
>> It's mostly fixing some relative li
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 14:44:53 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
> When writing this test, I noticed that a few other methods on ServerSocket
> and Socket also needed an update to their specification to match their
> current implementation.
Thanks, and doesn't surprise me that it's not explicitly specifi
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:45:56 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> I've now introduced a ClosedSocketTest and a ClosedServerSocketTest in their
>> relevant directories. Each of them invoke various operations on a closed
>> Socket/ServerSocket instance and verify that they throw the expected
>> exception
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:52:08 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>>> When writing this test, I noticed that a few other methods on ServerSocket
>>> and Socket also needed an update to their specification to match their
>>> current implementation.
>>
>> Thanks, and doesn't surprise me that it's not explic
> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of a
> few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>
> This is merely a doc update and doesn't change the implement
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:49:54 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
> This PR modifies links in the `InetAddress` class-level javadoc showed as
> `"#format"`.
> In addition, it changes one grammatical error in the adjacent paragraph.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: b21cb44e
Author:
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 16:45:35 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>>> I've now introduced a ClosedSocketTest and a ClosedServerSocketTest in
>>> their relevant directories. Each of them invoke various operations on a
>>> closed Socket/ServerSocket instance and verify that they throw the expected
>>> excep
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 11:10:43 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Hello Alan, I've now updated the PR to address this text.
>
> Thanks, I can review the CSR when it's ready.
Updated docs changes look good, thanks for taking the feedback through the
iterations.
-
PR Review Comment: https://
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 16:49:09 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Can I please get a review of this change which updates the specification of
>> a few methods in `java.net.Socket` and `java.net.ServerSocket` classes to
>> specify the `IOException` that the implementation currently already throws?
>>
>>
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 16:48:54 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> I've updated the PR to remove the usages of the parameterized test and
>> instead inline the operations within the test itself. The tests continue to
>> pass.
>
>> I think it would be better to not repeat the "if" in each of the thrown,
20 matches
Mail list logo
