Pito Salas wrote:
commons.collections.buffer.BlockingBuffer throws BufferUnderflowException
Why does that make sense? I would think that a BlockingBuffer cannot
underflow on a get().
So, an InterruptedException is turned into a BufferUnderflowException.
Usually InterruptedException is just re-thrown. I don't understand how
to interpret the conversion to a BufferUnderflowException, and whether
I can / should safely ignore it.
Buffer.get() can throw the underflow exception, as documented:
@throws BufferUnderflowException if the buffer is empty
For BlockingBuffer, you would not normally expect to receive the
underflow exception as the class waits for more data. However, if it
receives an interrupted exception while waiting we must handle it. We could:
a) silently ignore it (bad)
b) log it (but collections doesn't use logging)
c) throw it
We chose (c), and as InterruptedException is not runtime, it is wrapped
in a BufferUnderflowException.
You ask if you will receive it. Well, you will if you get a
InterruptedException during the wait. I can't really be more precise
than that.
Stephen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
