On Fri, 9 Oct 2026 08:38:43 GMT, Michael McMahon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/channels/ServerSocketChannel.java line
>> 133:
>>
>>> 131: * <p> The new channel's socket is initially unbound; it must be
>>> bound to a
>>> 132: * specific address via one of this class's {@link
>>> #bind(java.net.SocketAddress, int)
>>> 133: * bind} methods, before connections can be accepted. </p>
>>
>> This just changes the link from the 1-arg bind to the 2-arg bind methods, is
>> this necessary? I wonder if it would be clear to just say using the 1-arg
>> bind or the 2-arg bind method so that it links to both.
>
>> This just changes the link from the 1-arg bind to the 2-arg bind methods, is
>> this necessary? I wonder if it would be clear to just say using the 1-arg
>> bind or the 2-arg bind method so that it links to both.
>
> It's changing the reference from `java.net.ServerSocket` to the current class
> which is NIO `ServerSocketChannel`. Which I think is important because
> ServerSocket does not support UDS at all.
I should have been clearer. I agree it should not be linked to ServerSocket
method. I'm just saying this paragraph would read a bit better if it said
"using the bind(SocketAddress) or bind(SocketAddress, int) methods. That would
allow it to link to both methods instead of picking one.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/33249#discussion_r4229217839
