Pedro Leite Rocha wrote: > Hello. > > I've been using the bb_min/3 within another bb_min/3. But it seems to be > confusing the timeout I've set for one with the other. You are right, nested bb_min timeouts do not work correctly. It will be fixed in release 5.7. > There is a bb_min/3 with a timeout of 3600 and, inside it, another > bb_min/3 with a timeout of 100. It seems to be setting the timeout for the > inner function also to 3600. Is that possible? That would be surprising. I'd expect that when the 3600s timeout occurs while you are within a nested bb_min, then that inner bb_min will be terminated erroneously (before its 100s are over), and the outer bb_min will not be terminated at all. -- Joachim Schimpf / phone: +44 20 7594 8187 IC-Parc / mailto:J.Schimpf@imperial.ac.uk Imperial College London / http://www.icparc.ic.ac.uk/eclipseReceived on Fri Oct 31 15:24:01 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed 16 Nov 2005 06:07:26 PM GMT GMT