On 27/04/2016 10:04, Chris Hegarty wrote:
On 26 Apr 2016, at 18:21, Alan Bateman <alan.bate...@oracle.com> wrote:
I took a second pass over it. One thing that I'm wondering about is whether
BaseExtendedSocketOptions + Support should be collapsed into one abstract class
ExtendedSocketOptions (or better name) with 3 instance methods and 2 static methods. It's
an internal interface so not a big deal but I think it would be a bit cleaner and allowed
the oddly named "Support" to go away.
This works out quite nice. Webrev updated in-place:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~chegar/8044773/jdk/
I think this looks good.
The NoExtendedSocketOptions constructor should be able to just use
Collections.emptySet() as that is unmodifiable.
"no extended options" - it might be better to include option.name() in
the message.
Otherwise looks okay to me.
-Alan.
