1. 22
  1. 3

    rr always feels like wizardry! Great article by the way. Learnt a lot from it. Thanks for writing it.

    1. 1

      bit of an odd example because go test has a repeat flag; you can do go test -run TestWhatever -count=1000

      1. 7

        I find it much easier to deal with a trace which only contain the bad run.

        1. 1

          And how is what is written in the article different than a 3 line bash script with a loop in it? Why do I need rr? What advantage does rr bring to the table? What is it used for in this article that a bash script can’t solve? Those and many other questions are left unanswered I am afraid.

          1. 2

            Because it is actually reproducible, or at least closer:

            Remember, you’re debugging the recorded trace deterministically; not a live, nondeterministic execution. The replayed execution’s address spaces, register contents, syscall data etc are exactly the same in every run.

            1. 1

              The rr website explains it pretty well https://rr-project.org/

              You record a failure once, then debug the recording, deterministically, as many times as you want. The same execution is replayed every time.