EatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 1 month agoWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlimagemessage-square26linkfedilinkarrow-up1311arrow-down16
arrow-up1305arrow-down1imageWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlEatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 1 month agomessage-square26linkfedilink
minus-squareChais@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·1 month agoWell yes, the trick is to attach the debugger for the second run.
minus-squareElvith Ma'for@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up7·1 month ago…and because it slows down the execution a bit and this avoids the race condition that triggers the bug, it now runs flawlessly.
minus-squareTiredGoose@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month agoAnd the order of Set traversal in the JVM is different so the other bug also doesn’t show up
minus-squarepinball_wizard@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·1 month agoIf the customer isn’t running the same debugger i am, i have no sympathy for them. (I’m joking!)
Well yes, the trick is to attach the debugger for the second run.
…and because it slows down the execution a bit and this avoids the race condition that triggers the bug, it now runs flawlessly.
And the order of Set traversal in the JVM is different so the other bug also doesn’t show up
If the customer isn’t running the same debugger i am, i have no sympathy for them. (I’m joking!)