It's actually wrong to checkShutdown before nextDelivery: It can cause us to lose the last few deliveries before shutdown. It's also not neccessary

David R. MacIver · David R. MacIver · commit 81928c97c0a3 · 2010-02-10T12:19:56.000Z
diff --git a/src/com/rabbitmq/client/QueueingConsumer.java b/src/com/rabbitmq/client/QueueingConsumer.java
@@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ public QueueingConsumer(Channel ch, BlockingQueue<Delivery> q)
                                byte[] body)
         throws IOException
     {
+        checkShutdown();
         this._queue.add(new Delivery(envelope, properties, body));
     }
 
@@ -148,7 +149,6 @@ private Delivery handle(Delivery delivery)
     public Delivery nextDelivery()
         throws InterruptedException, ShutdownSignalException
     {
-        checkShutdown();
         return handle(_queue.take());
     }
 

Original file line number	Diff line number	Diff line change
`@@ -76,6 +76,7 @@ public QueueingConsumer(Channel ch, BlockingQueue<Delivery> q)`
`76`	`76`	`byte[] body)`
`77`	`77`	`throws IOException`
`78`	`78`	`{`
	`79`	`+ checkShutdown();`
`79`	`80`	`this._queue.add(new Delivery(envelope, properties, body));`
`80`	`81`	`}`
`81`	`82`
`@@ -148,7 +149,6 @@ private Delivery handle(Delivery delivery)`
`148`	`149`	`public Delivery nextDelivery()`
`149`	`150`	`throws InterruptedException, ShutdownSignalException`
`150`	`151`	`{`
`151`		`- checkShutdown();`
`152`	`152`	`return handle(_queue.take());`
`153`	`153`	`}`
`154`	`154`