On 15/06/2008, Oleg Kalnichevski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2008-06-15 at 15:31 +0100, sebb wrote: > > On 15/06/2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Author: olegk > > > Date: Sun Jun 15 05:50:39 2008 > > > New Revision: 667954 > > > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=667954&view=rev > > > Log: > > > HTTPCORE-163: Fixed AbstractMultiworkerIOReactor#execute() to correctly > propagate the original I/O exception in case of an abnormal termination. > > > Contributed by Patrick Moore <patmoore at ieee.org> > > > Reviewed by Oleg Kalnichevski > > > > > ... > > > > > > > @@ -155,6 +156,7 @@ > > > } > > > > > > if (this.status.compareTo(IOReactorStatus.ACTIVE) > 0) { > > > + completed = true; > > > break; > > > } > > > processEvents(readyCount); > > > @@ -180,11 +182,12 @@ > > > > > > } catch (ClosedSelectorException ex) { > > > > The exception is still ignored - or am I missing something here? > > > > I think there should at least be a comment to say why it can be ignored. > > > > I think it is ok to ignore this exception. It is thrown when an > operation is attempted on a closed selector, which means the i/o reactor > is in the process of being shut down. > > I'll add a comment to that effect. >
OK, thanks. The JIRA issue mentioned an ignored exception so I was surprised when it was still ignored after the patch was applied... Also, ignored exceptions tend to trigger bug warnings, so having a comment will help in future. > Oleg > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
