[concurrency-interest] Swing translates InterruptedException to Error

Joe Bowbeer joe.bowbeer at gmail.com
Fri Dec 14 21:26:56 EST 2007


See:

http://altair.cs.oswego.edu/mailman/private/concurrency-interest/2003-June/000456.html

In short: This code was originally even more broken, simply ignoring
interrupts. The IE is later transcoded to preserve method signatures.

In my opinion, it is not safe to modify documents asynchronously (that
is, on threads other than the EDT).  I think the Swing folks have
eventually come to this conclusion, too.

Given that this is broken, what's the advantage in throwing a
different kind of error?

--Joe

On Dec 14, 2007 6:39 PM, Darius Polonis <duplon at majorgames.de> wrote:
> Hello there,
>
> basically I have the same question as Tom Cargill in June 06, 2003
> (http://altair.cs.oswego.edu/mailman/private/concurrency-interest/
> 2003-June/000454.html). I am inserting strings from different threads
> and if such a thread is cancelled at the right time, the
> InterruptedException will be translated into this Error.
>
> It looks like it may be safely ignored, doesn't it? If it may be
> ignored, would it be possible to change the Error into a specific
> Error, so that catching code doesn't have to catch all Errors and
> make a decision based on the message string, but rather may catch the
> InterruptedException for example by themselfes?
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Darius
>


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list