On 10/20/26 8:23 PM, Eliot Courtney wrote:
On Wed Oct 21, 2026 at 12:12 PM JST, John Hubbard wrote:
On 10/20/26 7:57 PM, Eliot Courtney wrote:
On Tue Oct 20, 2026 at 11:27 PM JST, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
On Tue Oct 20, 2026 at 7:18 PM JST, sashiko-bot wrote:
[...]
I'm also fine with special casing `wait_for_msg`, but personally
(maybe) sleeping when you set timeout to Delta::ZERO sounds busted to
me.
It's not necessarily wrong, depending on how you think about it:
"sleep, but timeout at zero" is something I've seen used (I forget
where) as to mean "context switch away", kind of like a cpu_relax().
Here, it only sometimes sleeps ("(maybe)"), depending on the resolution
of the timer and how long stuff takes. So it's really pretty
inconsistent IMO.
Yes it is going to act in ways that look non-deterministic. And that's
OK, because:
a) It's not broken.
b) It's not unreasonable nor even terribly surprising behavior: one
can reason about it.
c) The requested behavior itself is impossible: "do X for an infinitely
short amount of time".
Why are we adding code to optimize behavior for callers that should
not even exist?
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
