RE: [cp-patches] Thread.sleep() update

[Mark Wielaard]

On Thu, 2004-12-30 at 16:18 +0100, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> If you say that sleep(0) should call yield() then we should probably
> do that instead of checking whether the Thread was interrupted() to
> make the VMThread interface as simple as possible. We should have
> never called VMThread.sleep() when it has a zero argument. It makes
> the work that needs to be done by the runtime more complex. But most
> importantly we need to document clearly what the expected behavior of
> VMThread.sleep() actually is if we cannot get the semantics right in
> Thread.sleep() itself.

And we would need at least good Mauve tests. I tried to write good ones
before writing and testing this new implementation (of course Thread
tests are always tricky so if I made any mistakes please point them
out). If you could make additions to test for the behavior you expect
here that would be nice.

Thanks,

Mark

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part