Charles-François Natali <neolo...@free.fr> added the comment: > You could make the test a loop, with the timeout increasing each time through > the loop, failing only if all tries fail. That way on faster machines the > test will pass faster. It'll take even longer on slow machines, but they are > slow anyway so that may be acceptable.
Yes, sure, but then it'll only make the test non determinist: let's say there's a non reproductible bug in subprocess' timeout implementation, if we retry upon error, it won't get caught unless if fails a couple time in a row, which may never happen. The idea is to have a timeout large enough so that the probablility of false positives is *low enough*. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue15152> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
