[8u-dev] RFR: 8036979: Support java.net.SocketOption<> in java.net socket types

[Michael McMahon]

On 11/04/14 10:27, Chris Hegarty wrote:
> This looks mainly good to me.
>
> Just a few small comments (mainly on the use of reflection):
>
> 1) jdk/net/Sockets.java
>    You could use a SharedSecret to access the private methods in the
>    public java.net package, but reflection is ok too.
>

I think the amount of reflection glue is not too much. So, I'd prefer
to stick with that in this instance.

> 2) If you stick with reflection then if a lookup of any of the methods
>    fails, throws ReflectiveOperationException, then you should probably
>    throw InternalError as there is something badly wrong.
>

okay, good idea.

> 3) Would it make sense for the invoker static methods of
>    jdk.net.Sockets to throw UncheckedIOException(e) ??
>
I'd prefer to throw IOException when it is an IOException.
I'm open to suggestion for when it's not an IOException.
I know RuntimeException is vague, but then again UncheckedIOException
doesn't seem right either to me, since it's something other
than an io exception in this situation.

Thanks,
Michael

> -Chris.
>
> On 10/04/14 18:13, Michael McMahon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is the webrev for the 8u20 version of the fix that was reviewed
>> yesterday for 9.
>>
>> JDK
>> ===
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8036979.8u20/jdk/01/webrev/
>>
>> Top repo
>> =====
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~michaelm/8036979.8u20/top/01/webrev/
>>
>> The good news is that the change is almost the same as the JDK 9 version
>> with the following differences:
>>
>> 1) The java.net public API changes are gone. The new public methods 
>> for 9
>>       in SocketImpl and DatagramSocketImpl are package private here.
>>
>> 2) A new package private class java.net.SocketsUtil acts as a bridge
>> between
>>      the public API in jdk.net.Sockets and the implementation in 
>> java.net
>>
>> 3) jdk.net.Sockets uses reflection to access the methods of
>> java.net.SocketsUtil
>>
>> 4) The test of the public java.net API is gone and the other test 
>> augmented
>>      with some additional tests for the standard socket options
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Michael