starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-02-04 05:35:20 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

wt fails tembench test - not displaying very long line #16018

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-31 04:54:59 +00:00 by claunia · 4 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 04:54:59 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @elsaco on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021).

Windows Terminal version

1.12.2931.0

Windows build number

10.0.19044.0

Other Software

termbench

Steps to reproduce

clone https://github.com/cmuratori/termbench.git
edit termbench.cpp and change Width & Height to wt default size (lines 361-362)
build solution
run small test

Expected Behavior

all output to be shown in wt tab

Actual Behavior

wt now displaying LongLine (test step nr. 2)

See 82afbc6925/termbench.cpp (L243) for details.

Sample test run with no terminal output beginning mark 20 to mark 32:

https://youtu.be/mGooOF1-Iy8

Video too bit for GitHub imposed size. Had to YouTube. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Originally created by @elsaco on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021). ### Windows Terminal version 1.12.2931.0 ### Windows build number 10.0.19044.0 ### Other Software termbench ### Steps to reproduce clone https://github.com/cmuratori/termbench.git edit `termbench.cpp` and change `Width` & `Height` to `wt` default size (lines 361-362) build solution run `small` test ### Expected Behavior all output to be shown in `wt` tab ### Actual Behavior `wt` now displaying `LongLine` (test step nr. 2) See https://github.com/cmuratori/termbench/blob/82afbc69256b4e22de913f0f02f82e0480f3dac5/termbench.cpp#L243 for details. Sample test run with no terminal output beginning mark 20 to mark 32: https://youtu.be/mGooOF1-Iy8 Video too bit for GitHub imposed size. Had to YouTube. Sorry for any inconvenience.
claunia added the Resolution-Duplicate label 2026-01-31 04:54:59 +00:00
claunia commented 2026-01-31 04:55:01 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021):

Looking through the code, that looks like the same root cause as /dup #11794, thanks!

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021): Looking through the code, that looks like the same root cause as /dup #11794, thanks!
claunia commented 2026-01-31 04:55:01 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021):

Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!

@ghost commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021): Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!
claunia commented 2026-01-31 04:55:02 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@lhecker commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021):

I've described a way to "fix" the issue here: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/11794#issuecomment-981110395
However it unfortunately proves that it's likely not - at least not fundamentally - possible to fix the issue... Applications kind of expect that each write() completes synchronously. If you break that promise you can see the result in the third of the 3 videos in my comment.
We could set an upper limit here and say "writes larger than 1MB are split up" and it would probably fix the issue. But what if we make our VT parser a lot faster and applications start expecting to write 1.1MB synchronously?

Realistically I find it unlikely that applications write mega- or gigabytes of ASCII characters in a single write though, which is why I'll submit a PR soon that caps the maximum write size, even if it breaks some hypothetical applications. But it'll be very difficult to choose a good upper limit... Maybe 4MB will do?

@lhecker commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021): I've described a way to "fix" the issue here: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/11794#issuecomment-981110395 However it unfortunately proves that it's likely not - at least not fundamentally - possible to fix the issue... Applications kind of expect that each `write()` completes synchronously. If you break that promise you can see the result in the third of the 3 videos in my comment. We could set an upper limit here and say "writes larger than 1MB are split up" and it would probably fix the issue. But what if we make our VT parser a lot faster and applications start expecting to write 1.1MB synchronously? Realistically I find it unlikely that applications write mega- or gigabytes of ASCII characters in a single write though, which is why I'll submit a PR soon that caps the maximum write size, even if it breaks some hypothetical applications. But it'll be very difficult to choose a good upper limit... Maybe 4MB will do?
claunia commented 2026-01-31 04:55:02 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DHowett commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021):

submit a PR soon that caps the maximum write size

I don't think we can do that. The cat's well and truly out of the bag on that one -- and I bet @ErykSun has the receipts to prove that we can't.

@DHowett commented on GitHub (Dec 1, 2021): > submit a PR soon that caps the maximum write size I don't think we can do that. The cat's well and truly out of the bag on that one -- and I bet @ErykSun has the receipts to prove that we can't.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label Resolution-Duplicate
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#16018
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?