From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Date: Wed,  3 Aug 2005 08:20:08 +0100
From: Uriel <uriell@binarydream.org>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] debugging p9p threads question
Message-ID: <20050803072008.GG9518@server4.lensbuddy.com>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0508021631260.27135@enigma.lanl.gov>
	<ee9e417a05080215483332b6ac@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.LNX.4.58.0508021657400.27198@enigma.lanl.gov>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0508021657400.27198@enigma.lanl.gov>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 72a632c2-ead0-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025


The most effective debugging tool is still careful thought, coupled with
judiciously placed print statements.

    -- Brian W. Kernighan, in the paper Unix for Beginners (1979)

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 05:00:18PM -0600, Ronald G. Minnich wrote:
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Russ Cox wrote:
> 
> > Print statements.
> 
> interesting, that's the answer in the supercomputing world too. 
> 
> Geez, why are we spending all this money on debuggers :-)
> 
> on the 65K CPU blue gene box, I've been told that "debugging with over 512 
> CPUs is ... printf". 
> 
> 
> > Your call to threadexitsall(0) at the end of
> > threadmain is wrong.  It should be threadexits().
> 
> Thanks. I did a stupid thing, changing the exits(0) from the plan 9 
> version to this threadexitsall(0)! oops.
> 
> ron