[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xmlblaster-devel] More TestFailsafe
Martin Johnson wrote:
Yes you'r right we could use the reachedAlive.
These callbacks are there to notify the client about state changes in
the client library. Some clients could ignore them, and some others
would like to take full control (for example by handling the queued
messages by themselves). The right place to do that stuff is in these
The semantics also provide the oppurtunity to catch reachedAlive no matter
what default behaviour is (flush or not etc).
The timeout on the sleeping thread is not going to be the only issue if
also problematic (long timeouts etc) if lower level polices are not in
I guess what I'm trying to say is, could you have test on reachedAlive
an brief sleep to continue instead of sleep with fingers crossed and then
If not just for the sake of demo.
Yes the intention was just to have a unique name. The memory location
would fullfill this requirement. We were not able to reproduce the error
but I guess I will take a unique Timestamp instead and the problem
should be solved.
I am not able to reproduce that error. Could you have a closer look at it ?
I have no experience with that compiler but I am using gcc 2.95.3 and
Marcel gcc 3.2. Could you see which lexical_cast was failing ?
XmlBlasterAccess.cpp line 34
instanceName_ = lexical_cast<string>(this). This causes exception on my RH
and gives memory location on win32 is this the intention?
ddd is just a GUI frontend to the gdb. If there are problems with ddd
then you have trhe same problems with gdb. I am not really up to date on
this issue. I heard however that there are pathches available meanwhile
for gdb which should handle multithreading correctly.
Are you trusting ddd ? I believe it is not handling threads right.
Thanks for the tip. What do you use? just straight gdb? please advise I'm
just a lowly win32 programmer who wishes for easy GUI.