>
> Perhaps we should increase the alloted time _and_ check explicitly if
> an egregious amount of time has passed in the unittest. If so, we can
> skip the test instead of failing it.
That's probably a good idea.
I was able to get the current version to fail on my PC at work
intermittently by running something else that was eating CPU.
Is there a way to output a warning - but not a failure?
The problem with not failing when an egregious about of time passes is
that that is exactly what the test is looking for!
