Last Comment Bug 650581 - Test for bug 500328 should avoid using flaky timeouts
: Test for bug 500328 should avoid using flaky timeouts
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
:
Product: Core
Classification: Components
Component: DOM (show other bugs)
: unspecified
: x86 Mac OS X
: -- normal (vote)
: mozilla6
Assigned To: :Ehsan Akhgari
:
Mentors:
Depends on:
Blocks: 500328 FlakyTimeout
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2011-04-16 20:24 PDT by :Ehsan Akhgari
Modified: 2011-04-26 13:42 PDT (History)
2 users (show)
See Also:
Crash Signature:
(edit)
QA Whiteboard:
Iteration: ---
Points: ---
Has Regression Range: ---
Has STR: ---


Attachments
Patch (v1) (3.54 KB, patch)
2011-04-16 20:25 PDT, :Ehsan Akhgari
jonas: review+
Details | Diff | Splinter Review

Description :Ehsan Akhgari 2011-04-16 20:24:57 PDT

    
Comment 1 :Ehsan Akhgari 2011-04-16 20:25:35 PDT
Created attachment 526552 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch (v1)
Comment 2 Justin Lebar (not reading bugmail) 2011-04-17 02:47:52 PDT
I'm not even sure why that longWait is there, to be perfectly honest.  Presumably it doesn't work with setTimeout(0).  But if the idiom you replaced it with is useful, then maybe it belongs in SimpleTest?

Thanks for taking on this project, Ehsan.
Comment 3 :Ehsan Akhgari 2011-04-17 14:21:01 PDT
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm not even sure why that longWait is there, to be perfectly honest. 
> Presumably it doesn't work with setTimeout(0).

This is used to test to make sure that something doesn't happen.  Depending on the number of events that need to be processed for that thing to happen (in a buggy situation), setTimeout(0) might not work.

>  But if the idiom you replaced
> it with is useful, then maybe it belongs in SimpleTest?

Maybe.  I've used this idiom in a bunch of places so far.  But I think this is something that can easily be done if needed later.  At this point, I don't want to worry about abstracting these types of idioms into SimpleTest functions.

> Thanks for taking on this project, Ehsan.

No problem!  Any help is appreciated BTW.  :-)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.