Why don't ppl use threads for serversockets? They place them in main and any
such places. Are there any drawbacks to this?
listenSocket = new ServerSocket(port);
Socket clientSocket = listenSocket.accept();
Re: ServerSocket question
I'm not an expert on the subject, but since no one else posted a response
give it a shot. In one of my CS classes we wrote a proxy server and proxy
thread. In the main we
had something like,
serverSocket = new ServerSocket(port_number);
and waited for a client to connect to the port. Then When a client connected
clientSocket = serverSocket.accept();
This started a thread that handled the real work of the proxy.
This means the server can immediately go back to it's job of waiting for
a client to connect to it's port. To answer your question about draw backs,
imagine it is really a question of what you are trying to accomplish and
the best way to
implement that in code. And not so much if it is better to do that in a thread
or in the main.
Hope this helped.
"Freddy" <.@.> wrote:
>Why don't ppl use threads for serversockets? They place them in main and
>such places. Are there any drawbacks to this?
>listenSocket = new ServerSocket(port);
>Socket clientSocket = listenSocket.accept();
-- Android Development Center
-- Cloud Development Project Center
-- HTML5 Development Center
-- Windows Mobile Development Center