On 27-02-2014, at 10:47 AM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:

> Your note is amusing.  Saying an exception is not handled, but not
> saying what should be done by the handler.  Simultaneously admitting
> not knowing about sockets and criticizing its "up-to-dateness".  I
> guess you mean correctness.

No, I mean that I looked a socket code to try to find examples to help me understand how they might have changed since the ancient scratch code I need to update, found that the #connect… methods now appear to include what used to be in the #waitForConn… type methods and then tried a bit of test code that seems not to be using the newer system.

Since the newer code raises exceptions from the #connect… rather than simply setting the socket status, the test code opens a degugger. Now maybe some other test code in the unit test stuff does indeed handle the exception but I didn’t spot it. And the point remains that doing 
socket connect….
socket waitUntil….
will potentially do the wait timeout twice which seems unlikely to be what is wanted.



tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Useful random insult:- Suffers from Clue Deficit Disorder.