You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I thought I had addressed all of the bugs in the sub-millisecond ID generation, but it seems like there is still a rare/subtle one still in there. I didn't take a screenshot but what I observed when the failure happened is that the timeStampSet appeared to have two items (there should have been only 1) where the second item was the same as the first but with an appended zero (0).
I'm not sure how it overflowed... Might need to run the sub-millisecond tests a bajillion times to see what the actual error was.
Also, the test for detecting that an overflow happened is not well designed: expect(e instanceof Error).toBe(true) is not specific enough to determine which error was thrown.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I thought I had addressed all of the bugs in the sub-millisecond ID generation, but it seems like there is still a rare/subtle one still in there. I didn't take a screenshot but what I observed when the failure happened is that the
timeStampSet
appeared to have two items (there should have been only 1) where the second item was the same as the first but with an appended zero (0
).I'm not sure how it overflowed... Might need to run the sub-millisecond tests a bajillion times to see what the actual error was.
Also, the test for detecting that an overflow happened is not well designed:
expect(e instanceof Error).toBe(true)
is not specific enough to determine which error was thrown.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: