On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 04:04:22PM +0200, Artur Bergman wrote:
> 01-05-09 15.58, skrev Chip Cuntz p� [EMAIL PROTECTED] f�ljande:
>
> > I might be able to help. Since I am so new to the list what kind of testing
> > of local time needs to be done?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Artur Bergman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 5:35 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Reports and questions.
> >
> > It would be nice if somone could help writing test cases for more functions
> > to map the problem area.
> >
> >
>
> Basicly the problem is if you call some functions at the same time you get
> different results because they interfer wich each other.
>
> I will write a paper and an example on how the localtime test works and post
> it with the new release.
Uhhh....Sarathy will accuse me of FUDing again :-) but you can't
really test for threadsafety of X. Not in any useful manner, anyway.
(0) You must run the test in a true multi-CPU box. Otherwise you
will not get race for the same state.
(1) You cannot prove threadsafety. You may run the X test for
an hour, a day, a week, and still not see data corruption.
In simple cases like localtime the corruption may of course
hit much earlier.
(2) You can prove threadUNsafety. As soon as you see data corruption
you know your X is-- but there's no saying how soon that will
happen.
> Artur
--
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
# There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
# It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen
