EatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 2 months agoWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlimagemessage-square26linkfedilinkarrow-up1314
arrow-up1314imageWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlEatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 2 months agomessage-square26linkfedilink
minus-squareChais@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 months agoWell yes, the trick is to attach the debugger for the second run.
minus-squareElvith Ma'for@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up7·2 months 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-up2·2 months 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-up2·2 months 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!)