Message157285
| Author |
pitrou |
| Recipients |
Arfrever, Jim.Jewett, asvetlov, gregory.p.smith, gvanrossum, ncoghlan, pitrou, r.david.murray, skrah, vstinner |
| Date |
2012年04月01日.13:25:40 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1333286435.3449.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> |
| In-reply-to |
<1333285198.25.0.724272912785.issue14417@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
> OK, here's a version with a low switch interval. Of course it's also
> contrived, but it works.
The drawback of using setswitchinterval() is that it makes the test less
reusable by other implementations (or perhaps it will succeed without
actually checking the desired behaviour). |
|