Re: Re: [xmlblaster-devel] More TestFailsafe

["Martin Johnson" <mjhn at bigpond.net.au>]

Hi Michele

>
>These callbacks are there to notify the client about state changes in
>the client library. Some clients could ignore them, and some others
>would like to take full control (for example by handling the queued
>messages by themselves). The right place to do that stuff is in these
>reached* methods.

The semantics also provide the oppurtunity to catch reachedAlive no matter
what default behaviour is (flush or not etc).

The timeout on the sleeping thread is not going to be the only issue if
network is
also problematic (long timeouts etc) if lower level polices are  not in
place.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, could you have test on reachedAlive
an brief sleep to continue instead of sleep with fingers crossed and then
assert.

If not just for the sake of demo.

>I am not able to reproduce that error. Could you have a closer look at it ?

Yep.

>I have no experience with that compiler but I am using gcc 2.95.3 and
>Marcel gcc 3.2. Could you see which lexical_cast was failing ?

XmlBlasterAccess.cpp line 34

instanceName_ = lexical_cast<string>(this). This causes exception on my RH
and gives memory location on win32 is this the intention?

>Are you trusting ddd ? I believe it is not handling threads right.

Thanks for the tip. What do you use? just straight gdb? please advise I'm
just a lowly win32 programmer who wishes for easy GUI.

Regards
Martin