On Mon, 2016-03-14 at 14:23 +0100, Richard Braun wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 02:16:17PM +0100, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Svante Signell, on Mon 14 Mar 2016 12:20:18 +0100, wrote: > > > Why, because it doesn't have a sleep statement? > > > > I was referring to strict logic: it's not just because it happens to > > Also, using sleep for synchronization is always wrong.
Dear Richard and Samuel, I know using sleep is considered bad! Please tell me how the test code should be written to wait for the acknowledgement from the receiver. That would be more productive than complaining :)
