On Fri, 12 Sep 2003, Bill Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Stefan Bodewig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >> wouldn't it be better to put the "accepted = null" into a finally >> block > > Wouldn't do anything. The 'accepted' variable is local to the > stack-frame, so it goes away if I throw clear of the method.
OK, thanks. I just looked at the commit mail as I suspect that one of our customer production systems gets bitten by the bug - I didn't look at the complete code. Makes sense, then. > I briefly thought about changing the catch to 'Throwable', but is it > really possible for Socket.close to throw anything other than an > Exception? Everything is possible ;-) I have no idea what the Socket implementation does if shutdown(2) sets errno to ENOTCONN for example (I'd guess, throw a plain SocketException). I don't think that non-Exceptions are too likely to happen and if they do it probably happens in a situation where you can't recover anyway (OutOfMemory, StackOverflow, ThreadDeath ...). Catching Throwable may be the savest thing to do. Stefan --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
