EatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 1 day agoWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlimagemessage-square19linkfedilinkarrow-up1260arrow-down15
arrow-up1255arrow-down1imageWhy I always keep doing it...lemmy.mlEatingOnions@lemmy.world to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 1 day agomessage-square19linkfedilink
minus-squareChais@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·23 hours agoWell yes, the trick is to attach the debugger for the second run.
minus-squareElvith Ma'for@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up7·22 hours 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-squarepinball_wizard@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·20 hours agoIf the customer isn’t running the same debugger i am, i have no sympathy for them. (I’m joking!)
minus-squareTiredGoose@lemmy.ziplinkfedilinkarrow-up2·21 hours agoAnd the order of Set traversal in the JVM is different so the other bug also doesn’t show up
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.
If the customer isn’t running the same debugger i am, i have no sympathy for them. (I’m joking!)
And the order of Set traversal in the JVM is different so the other bug also doesn’t show up