See: http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?runid=36650&logid=6

Does anyone have the time to investigate this?

Thanks,
Alex
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
phobos@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

I tested same configuration on Mac, but no failure.
Failed test seems to depend on machine state.

    static void slowFun() { Thread.sleep(dur!"msecs"(1)); }
    auto pool1 = new TaskPool();
    auto tSlow = task!slowFun();
    pool1.put(tSlow);
    pool1.finish();
    assert(!tSlow.done);

Calling finish without true argument, finish doesn't wait the task. So the result of tSlow.done depends on the timing.

I don't understand the std.parallelism deeply,
but this failure may occurs on other environments.


Masahiro

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex@gmail.com> wrote:
> See: http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?runid=36650&logid=6
>
> Does anyone have the time to investigate this?
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
_______________________________________________
phobos mailing list
phobos@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos

The test is wrong, not the implementation of std.parallelism.
 finish(false) doesn't guarantee that the task won't be finished, it just
means that the task *may* not be finished.  IDK how this test made it in
there.  I'll make a pull request to get rid of it.


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Masahiro Nakagawa <repeatedly@gmail.com>wrote:

> I tested same configuration on Mac, but no failure.
> Failed test seems to depend on machine state.
>
>     static void slowFun() { Thread.sleep(dur!"msecs"(1)); }
>     auto pool1 = new TaskPool();
>     auto tSlow = task!slowFun();
>     pool1.put(tSlow);
>     pool1.finish();
>     assert(!tSlow.done);
>
> Calling finish without true argument, finish doesn't wait the task. So the result of tSlow.done depends on the timing.
>
> I don't understand the std.parallelism deeply,
> but this failure may occurs on other environments.
>
>
> Masahiro
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex@gmail.com> wrote:
> > See:
> http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?runid=36650&logid=6
> >
> > Does anyone have the time to investigate this?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Alex
> > _______________________________________________
> > phobos mailing list
> > phobos@puremagic.com
> > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
> _______________________________________________
> phobos mailing list
> phobos@puremagic.com
> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/995


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 9:21 AM, David Simcha <dsimcha@gmail.com> wrote:

> The test is wrong, not the implementation of std.parallelism.
>  finish(false) doesn't guarantee that the task won't be finished, it just
> means that the task *may* not be finished.  IDK how this test made it in
> there.  I'll make a pull request to get rid of it.
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Masahiro Nakagawa <repeatedly@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I tested same configuration on Mac, but no failure.
>> Failed test seems to depend on machine state.
>>
>>     static void slowFun() { Thread.sleep(dur!"msecs"(1)); }
>>     auto pool1 = new TaskPool();
>>     auto tSlow = task!slowFun();
>>     pool1.put(tSlow);
>>     pool1.finish();
>>     assert(!tSlow.done);
>>
>> Calling finish without true argument, finish doesn't wait the task. So the result of tSlow.done depends on the timing.
>>
>> I don't understand the std.parallelism deeply,
>> but this failure may occurs on other environments.
>>
>>
>> Masahiro
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Alex Rønne Petersen <xtzgzorex@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > See:
>> http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/test_data.ghtml?runid=36650&logid=6
>> >
>> > Does anyone have the time to investigate this?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Alex
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > phobos mailing list
>> > phobos@puremagic.com
>> > http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>> _______________________________________________
>> phobos mailing list
>> phobos@puremagic.com
>> http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
>>
>
>