Code Review Request: 7035556 DatagramSocket.java:183: warning: unreachable catch clause

[Chris Hegarty]

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.
>
>