You are, of course, correct about this. I seem to have confused myself
in here
somewhere. I must have done something like this in C code or something.
Now THAT's
off-topic :-) I'm sure this close trick applied to something I've done
in Java, but
I wish I could remember what.
As far as actually sol
I thought that the whole process blocked on blocking IO calls only in
the case of
System.in, due to the original implementation. I'm on thin ice here,
though. I was
under the impression that other blocking IO calls were written to use
non-blocking
OS primitives.
John Snell wrote:
>
> Shouldn't t
This thread isn't exactly topical to Java-Linux, but I'll throw in my 2
bits to bring
it some closure, I hope.
It is true that Socket.setSoTimeout(int timeout) causes reads to throw
an
InterruptedIOException, but the problem he is trying to solve is that it
does NOT
cause connects to throw an exce
