<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.webkit.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - REGRESSION (r188642): All pages are blank when printing a webpage in iOS Safari"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157924#c4">Comment # 4</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - REGRESSION (r188642): All pages are blank when printing a webpage in iOS Safari"
href="https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=157924">bug 157924</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:fpizlo@apple.com" title="Filip Pizlo <fpizlo@apple.com>"> <span class="fn">Filip Pizlo</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>There are two issues I think:
1) The functional style would have you let WTF::Condition do the time math for you. Instead of having a wait loop, do:
m_condition.waitFor(m_lock, timeout, [&] () -> bool { loop body });
2) The style that I've been settling on is to just use doubles for time. Maybe when I have time to mess around I'll propose that we do this. I've encountered so many bugs due to std::chrono having overflows where our old double-based time code would have recovered like a champ. In fact, one of those overflows was in GCC's version of libstdc++! It would cause some uses of std::condition_variable to freak out on Linux but not anywhere else.
In this case, we could just go back to using a double timeout. waitForSeconds(+Inf) should correctly cause our code to recognize that you want to timeout forever.
I'm also fine with Geoff's proposed solution.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>