Flush after println(xs...) (but not after println(stdout, xs...)) #57646
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Ref #310 #13954 #50718
I just got bitten by this (again), and it was very confusing (again): I converted my interactive job to a slurm job and thought it didn't work properly when I didn't see any debug output in the log file.
@KristofferC you say in #50718 that that PR would flush too much, and I agree this is potentially true for arbitrary IO, but here I propose to just flush on println(x), which is presumably not used for "serious" IO. This would not impact
println(io, x). It has the downside thatprintln(x)is not the same asprintln(stdout, x)but I think that's fair game compared to the confusion caused by not buffering anything.