There is SSLTest.java which follows SSLSocketSample.java and can be used
by other tests.
Artem
On 10/26/2016 09:45 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
The new test case is just a test in order to make sure this approach works in
the testing environment. I plan to remove both of the sample and template, a
The new test case is just a test in order to make sure this approach works in
the testing environment. I plan to remove both of the sample and template, and
re-org them to a class that can be inherited from.
Xuelei
> On 27 Oct 2016, at 12:31 AM, Bradford Wetmore
> wrote:
>
> Xuelei,
>
> So
Xuelei,
Sorry that I didn't have time to look at this earlier.
Why did you create a new file SSLSocketSample.java instead of just
updating SSLSocketTemplate.java? Why should I use one vs the other?
IMHO, unless there's a good reason to keep both, we should just copy the
contents of SSLSocke
On 7/25/2016 13:14, Xuelei Fan wrote:
On 7/25/2016 12:15 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
Is it possible to use a single new CountDownLatch(2)?
Per the spec, the countDown() release all waiting threads if the count
reaches zero, and the await() will not return until the latch has
counted down to zero,
On 7/25/2016 12:15 PM, Weijun Wang wrote:
> Is it possible to use a single new CountDownLatch(2)?
>
Per the spec, the countDown() release all waiting threads if the count
reaches zero, and the await() will not return until the latch has
counted down to zero, or interrupted or timeout. It's diffic
Is it possible to use a single new CountDownLatch(2)?
Also, I think comments on lines 145-149 and 199-203 are not really
necessary, the println() lines after them are quite clear.
--Max
On 7/25/2016 11:38, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Hi Weijun,
Please review this update. Per you suggestion, I update
Hi Weijun,
Please review this update. Per you suggestion, I updated to use
CountDownLatch for the synchronization between client and server.
CountDownLatch is more simple than ReentrantLock in the context.
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8161106/webrev.03/
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 7/14/2016 1:
Hi Xuelei,
The webrev looks good to me. Please see inline.
On 07/12/2016 10:36 PM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, Artem. Here is the updated webrev per your
suggestions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8161106/webrev.02/
On 7/13/2016 1:03 AM, Artem Smotrakov wrote:
Hi Xu
Thanks for the feedback, Artem. Here is the updated webrev per your
suggestions:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8161106/webrev.02/
On 7/13/2016 1:03 AM, Artem Smotrakov wrote:
> Hi Xuelei,
>
> I am not an official reviewer, but I have a couple of comments.
>
> 1. line 149: would it be
Hi Xuelei,
I am not an official reviewer, but I have a couple of comments.
1. line 149: would it be better to check this condition in a loop?
2. Using try-with-resources blocks might simplify doServerSide() a
little bit (no need to call close() on sockets, and a couple of "try"
blocks might b
There is a nice catch of the timeout miss-match during the handling of
serverIsReady in doClientSide(). Here is the updated webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~xuelei/8161106/webrev.01/
Thanks,
Xuelei
On 7/11/2016 11:44 AM, Xuelei Fan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Please review this enhancement of SSL
11 matches
Mail list logo
