Hi Daniel, Patrick,
I wonder is there an opportunity here to refine the constructor
descriptions a
little, also
The wording associated with wildcard addressing includes
* an IP address chosen by the kernel.
which is not actually correct, and maybe it should be omitted from
the various constructor descriptions.
there is explicit reference to IPv4 INADDR_ANY (0.0.0.0) which may warrant
a rewording to more general wildcard address {@link
InetAddress#isAnyLocalAddress}
I think the following wording was proposed offline
changing
* If the IP address is 0.0.0.0, the socket will be bound to the
* {@link InetAddress#isAnyLocalAddress wildcard} address,
* an IP address chosen by the kernel.
to
* If the IP address is a {@link InetAddress#isAnyLocalAddress wildcard} address
* (or is {@code null}), the socket will be bound to the wildcard address.
also changing
The socket will be bound to the
{@link InetAddress#isAnyLocalAddress wildcard} address,
an IP address chosen by the kernel.
to
The socket will be bound to the
{@link InetAddress#isAnyLocalAddress wildcard} address.
best regards
Mark
________________________________
From: net-dev <net-dev-boun...@openjdk.java.net> on behalf of Daniel Fuchs
<daniel.fu...@oracle.com>
Sent: Tuesday 28 April 2020 15:32
To: Patrick Concannon <patrick.concan...@oracle.com>; OpenJDK Network Dev list
<net-dev@openjdk.java.net>
Subject: Re: RFR[8243507]: 'DatagramSocket constructors don’t always specify
what happens when passed invalid parameters'
Hi Patrick,
Looks good to me.
I realize we haven't specified what happens if the `laddr` is null.
Are you planning to fix that in a separate changeset or tag it to
this one?
Maybe we should unify the description of the `port` parameter in
the two constructors:
327 * @param port port to use.
357 * @param port local port to use
Maybe:
* @param port local port to use in the bind operation.
Nit: It's customary to break line before <p>:
343 * address. <p><a id="PortRange"></a>The local port must be
between 0 and
suggest:
343 * address.
* <p><a id="PortRange"></a>The local port must be
best regards,
-- daniel
On 28/04/2020 10:33, Patrick Concannon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Could someone please review my fix for JDK-8243507 'DatagramSocket
> constructors don’t always specify what happens when passed invalid
> parameters'?
>
> Currently, the DatagramSocket constructor `DatagramSocket(SocketAddress
> bindaddr)` doesn't specify what happens if passed a SocketAddress
> subclass not supported by this socket.
> Also, there are two DatagramSocket constructors that accept a port
> number, but neither constructor specifies what happens when passed port
> 0, or a port which falls outside of the valid range of port numbers i.e
> between 0 and 65535 inclusive.
>
> This fix updates the spec for each these constructors to inform the user
> of what happens when passed an invalid argument. For the constructors
> that take a port, the spec will now specify that an
> IllegalArgumentException is thrown when passed a port outside of the
> acceptable range, or, if zero is passed, that the system will choose an
> appropriate port for them. For the constructor that takes a
> SocketAddress, an IllegalArgumentException will be thrown if an invalid
> SocketAddress subclass is passed as a parameter.
>
> bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8243507
> csr: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8243976
> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~pconcannon/8243507/webrevs/webrev.00/
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Patrick
>
