Nathan Beyer wrote: > I think the patch is fine and should be included. Ack - thanks Nathan.
Committed at r711495. Regards, Tim > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Sian January wrote: >>> Sorry not to reply on the other thread a bit earlier, but isn't this >>> part of the spec? >>> >>> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/api/java/nio/channels/SelectableChannel.html#register(java.nio.channels.Selector, >>> int, java.lang.Object) says that register "throws >>> IllegalSelectorException - If this channel was not created by the same >>> provider as the given selector" >> They are both coming from the same provider (Harmony's in-built provider). >> >>> I wasn't 100% clear from the other thread - is it that the RI doesn't >>> follow the spec, or were we throwing the exception in the wrong case? >> The spec doesn't preclude setting a selector that has an empty interest >> set. It's unusual but shouldn't really be forbidden, so I think the >> patch should be good to go in. I'm just looking for an OK now that we >> are in code freeze. >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> >
