Re: How to block tests on hydra

[Noam Postavsky <npostavs@users.sourceforge.net>]

On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> wrote:
>>
>> I'm surprised it does anything at all actually, isn't the (add-to-list
>> 'buffers ...) call a bug? Should be using `push' I think.
>>
>> -              (add-to-list 'buffers (generate-new-buffer "foo")))
>> +              (push (generate-new-buffer "foo") buffers))
>
> Why that? `add-to-list' is as good as `push' in this case. I haven't seen a
> problem with that. If you run in edebug, you'll see that `buffers' keeps
> all process buffers.

But you have lexical-binding:t set at the top of the file, and
`buffer' is a let-bound variable, whereas `add-to-list' operates on
dynamic variables. Hmm, looking at the disassembly it seems that
add-to-list's compiler macro fixed up the problem, although I thought
it should give a compile warning in this situation.

>
>> I noticed you added a with-timeout on that test, but it doesn't seem
>> to be working.
>
> The timeout is a self-defense. And it doesn't trigger at least for me,
> because (I believe) the test case is working properly now, and finishes
> in time.

What about this one:

http://hydra.nixos.org/eval/1373949
https://nix-cache.s3.amazonaws.com/log/v7ndmrhdhjw76v9mzghjyijnsmw2npl8-emacs-coverage-unknown.drv

>
>> By the way, I hit the "`tramp-test36-asynchronous-requests' timed out"
>> message when running locally in an -O0 build, although it succeeds
>> with an -O2 build. Maybe I just have a weak CPU.
>
> How does it make a difference? Is an asynchronous process to be intended
> to run in another thread, on another processor?

I don't know why it makes a difference.