They make sense since the Op knows that there is socket related exception which Op wrote to it's own catch block. To me the the code was only getting SocketException for a while and then he got other excepion which it couldn't caught by SocketException and then he added the same catch code block with Exception without taking the account of future coders since he got relief at that moment.

RyanDev wrote: What did you do to try and change things? You're missing the point. These people are thick as a brick. There was one instance where the manager espoused this weird idea of how she wanted source code control to be used. Myself and the eleven others on the team tried to explain to her that was not how source code worked. Her reply, "That's how it will work here!" So the weight of opinion/knowledge was totally ignored. Another time I had written a universal sortation package in FORTH (the company standard), it handled infinite diverter types with infinite geometries, and a new manager came in and decreed all programs were to be written in 'C', to be more "commercial." I tried to explain the program could not be converted. FORTH allows you to modify the compiler as the program compiles. I wasn't playing games, but creating a dynamic preprocessor that generated data structures and populated them with values, depending on the code. No matter, the decision was made, logic had no bearing on it, even after I tried to walk him through the code to show how it worked. He admitted he didn't understand half of what I said (I'll estimates less than a third), but his mind was made up. Before you say I failed because I befuddled him, he didn't understand the concepts of how our systems worked, he was using what I call "Management By Magazine Article Logic" in that he had heard 'C' was a more popular language and that is what he was basing his decision on. So he threw away a program that solved all their problems, past, present, and future. I could write a book giving you more examples. Psychosis at 10 Film at 11 Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it. Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.

Jon Nethercott wrote: Master/slave is a model of communication where one device or process has unidirectional control over one or more other devices... The client/server characteristic describes the relationship of cooperating programs in an application... This distinction misses the point. In both cases, one device has unidirectional control over the other(s) and the relationship is cooperative. At any rate, no matter how you phrase it, the master/client makes requests of the slave/server which processes the commands on demand and both are otherwise mutually idle. -- Harvey