Message273260
| Author |
martin.panter |
| Recipients |
BreamoreBoy, brett.cannon, chris.jerdonek, ezio.melotti, martin.panter, serhiy.storchaka, zach.ware |
| Date |
2016年08月21日.02:50:28 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1471747828.65.0.974451092388.issue16968@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
I don’t know much about the concurrent.futures testing, but in general IMO it makes more sense to call thread.join(), or at least @reap_threads, in each individual test case that needs it. If appropriate, you can call join() with a one-second timeout, which should be functionally equivalent to @reap_threads. Leaving a background thread running while you start another test seems like a bad idea; concurrent tests aren’t meant to be run in the same process.
Also, I added a gc_collect() call to the test infrastructure in Issue 27787, which may help avoid problems with spurious "dangling" thread object references. |
|