Message163996
> You could make the test a loop, with the timeout increasing each time through the loop, failing only if all tries fail. That way on faster machines the test will pass faster. It'll take even longer on slow machines, but they are slow anyway so that may be acceptable.
Yes, sure, but then it'll only make the test non determinist: let's
say there's a non reproductible bug in subprocess' timeout
implementation, if we retry upon error, it won't get caught unless if
fails a couple time in a row, which may never happen.
The idea is to have a timeout large enough so that the probablility of
false positives is *low enough*. |
|
Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
2012-06-25 17:35:10 | neologix | set | recipients:
+ neologix, barry, pitrou, r.david.murray |
2012-06-25 17:35:09 | neologix | link | issue15152 messages |
2012-06-25 17:35:08 | neologix | create | |
|