[Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Akira Yokosawa]

Hi Paul,

While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.

"Heisenbug" is defined as:

> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 

"Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:

> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?

At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
the heisenbug.

The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
with this usage.

For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.

So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
also be a bug with something opposite in nature.

If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
something else) is being tracked down.

However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
of both bugs to "annihilate".

So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".

In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:

> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.

This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Akira Yokosawa]

On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> Hi Paul,
> 
> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
> 
> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
> 
>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
> 
> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
> 
>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> 
> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
> the heisenbug.
> 
> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
> with this usage.
> 
> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
> 
> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
> 
> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
> something else) is being tracked down.
> 
> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
> of both bugs to "annihilate".
> 
> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
> 
> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
> 
>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
> 
> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
> 

Oops, I sent this prematurely.
But you might be able to see my point here.

This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
done with whatever issue you are working on.

                              Thanks, Akira

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> > 
> > While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
> > I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
> > 
> > "Heisenbug" is defined as:
> > 
> >> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
> >> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
> > 
> > "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
> > 
> >> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
> >> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> > 
> > At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
> > the heisenbug.
> > 
> > The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
> > with this usage.
> > 
> > For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
> > antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
> > with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
> > Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
> > an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
> > 
> > So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
> > also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
> > 
> > If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
> > an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
> > something else) is being tracked down.
> > 
> > However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
> > a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
> > of both bugs to "annihilate".
> > 
> > So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
> > 
> > In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
> > 
> >> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
> >> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
> > 
> > This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
> > the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
> > 
> 
> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
> But you might be able to see my point here.
> 
> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
> done with whatever issue you are working on.

I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)

							Thanx, Paul

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Akira Yokosawa]

On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>> Hi Paul,
>>>
>>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
>>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
>>>
>>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
>>>
>>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
>>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
>>>
>>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
>>>
>>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
>>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
>>>
>>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
>>> the heisenbug.
>>>
>>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
>>> with this usage.
>>>
>>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
>>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
>>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
>>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
>>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
>>>
>>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
>>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
>>>
>>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
>>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
>>> something else) is being tracked down.
>>>
>>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
>>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
>>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
>>>
>>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
>>>
>>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
>>>
>>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
>>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
>>>
>>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
>>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
>>>
>>
>> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
>> But you might be able to see my point here.
>>
>> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
>> done with whatever issue you are working on.
> 
> I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
> 

So, what about adding a footnote like this?

                        Thanks, Akira

--8<-->8--
From cdf227d76d6ec3b40f2dfd6f1a55aba7a1e1bb49 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 16:40:15 +0900
Subject: [PATCH] debugging: Add footnote on the use of 'anti-heisenbug'

Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
---
 debugging/debugging.tex | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
index e621ebd..146c696 100644
--- a/debugging/debugging.tex
+++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
@@ -1386,7 +1386,11 @@ causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
 If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
 logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
 Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
-Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
+Why not create an anti-heisenbug\footnote{
+	Here, we'll use ``anti-heisenbug'' to denote whatever means
+	which would help us track down a given heisenbug, rather than
+	its counterpart in a scrict sense of particle physics.}
+to annihilate the heisenbug?

 This section describes a number of ways to do just that:

-- 
2.7.4

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:14:57PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>> Hi Paul,
> >>>
> >>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
> >>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
> >>>
> >>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
> >>>
> >>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
> >>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
> >>>
> >>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
> >>>
> >>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
> >>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> >>>
> >>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
> >>> the heisenbug.
> >>>
> >>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
> >>> with this usage.
> >>>
> >>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
> >>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
> >>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
> >>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
> >>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
> >>>
> >>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
> >>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
> >>>
> >>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
> >>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
> >>> something else) is being tracked down.
> >>>
> >>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
> >>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
> >>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
> >>>
> >>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
> >>>
> >>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
> >>>
> >>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
> >>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
> >>>
> >>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
> >>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
> >>>
> >>
> >> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
> >> But you might be able to see my point here.
> >>
> >> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
> >> done with whatever issue you are working on.
> > 
> > I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
> 
> So, what about adding a footnote like this?

That isn't bad at all!

But let's take a look at several possible approaches:

o	Continue using "anti-heisenbug", but remove the current definition.
	(To the extent that it could be considered to be a definition.)

o	Use the following analogy:

		When you annihilate an electron and a positron, you don't
		get nothingness, you instead get an energetic photon.
		Similarly, when you annihilate a heisenbug and an
		anti-heisenbug, you don't (usually) get nothingness,
		instead, you get a (hopefully) easier-to-locate bug.

o	The solution you propose below.

o	Leave as is, and assume that people will get the "poetic license".

o	Additional ideas here!

o	Any of the above, but have a quick quiz on the definition
	instead of a footnote or an inline definition/explanation.

Thoughts?

							Thanx, Paul

>                         Thanks, Akira
> 
> --8<-->8--
> >From cdf227d76d6ec3b40f2dfd6f1a55aba7a1e1bb49 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 16:40:15 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] debugging: Add footnote on the use of 'anti-heisenbug'
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> ---
>  debugging/debugging.tex | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
> index e621ebd..146c696 100644
> --- a/debugging/debugging.tex
> +++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
> @@ -1386,7 +1386,11 @@ causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
>  If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
>  logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
>  Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
> -Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> +Why not create an anti-heisenbug\footnote{
> +	Here, we'll use ``anti-heisenbug'' to denote whatever means
> +	which would help us track down a given heisenbug, rather than
> +	its counterpart in a scrict sense of particle physics.}
> +to annihilate the heisenbug?
> 
>  This section describes a number of ways to do just that:
> 
> -- 
> 2.7.4
> 
> 

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Akira Yokosawa]

On 2017/05/03 07:59:48 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:14:57PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>>> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>
>>>>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
>>>>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
>>>>>
>>>>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
>>>>>
>>>>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
>>>>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
>>>>>
>>>>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
>>>>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
>>>>>
>>>>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
>>>>> the heisenbug.
>>>>>
>>>>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
>>>>> with this usage.
>>>>>
>>>>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
>>>>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
>>>>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
>>>>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
>>>>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
>>>>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
>>>>>
>>>>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
>>>>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
>>>>> something else) is being tracked down.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
>>>>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
>>>>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
>>>>>
>>>>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
>>>>>
>>>>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
>>>>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
>>>>>
>>>>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
>>>>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
>>>> But you might be able to see my point here.
>>>>
>>>> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
>>>> done with whatever issue you are working on.
>>>
>>> I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
>>
>> So, what about adding a footnote like this?
> 
> That isn't bad at all!
> 
> But let's take a look at several possible approaches:
> 
> o	Continue using "anti-heisenbug", but remove the current definition.
> 	(To the extent that it could be considered to be a definition.)
> 
> o	Use the following analogy:
> 
> 		When you annihilate an electron and a positron, you don't
> 		get nothingness, you instead get an energetic photon.
> 		Similarly, when you annihilate a heisenbug and an
> 		anti-heisenbug, you don't (usually) get nothingness,
> 		instead, you get a (hopefully) easier-to-locate bug.
> 
> o	The solution you propose below.
> 
> o	Leave as is, and assume that people will get the "poetic license".
> 
> o	Additional ideas here!
> 
> o	Any of the above, but have a quick quiz on the definition
> 	instead of a footnote or an inline definition/explanation.
> 
> Thoughts?

I looked around the use of "heisenbug" and found an entry in quora:

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle

What "heisenbug" should imply is the "observer effect", not the "uncertainty principle".

So the definition of heisenbug given in the text is already confusing.

An example of observer effect in quantum mechanics is interference of
electron beam passing through double slit.
If you don't know which slit each electron passes, you can observe interference
pattern. But once you put some equipment to know which slit an individual
electron passes, you no longer see the interference pattern.

This situation is much relevant to heisenbug, isn't it?

Heisenberg used observer effect to explain his uncertainty principle as
a thought experiment on the gamma-ray microscope.
This is the origin of the confusion. And most people are still confused.

So I don't like to see further analogies with misleading implications, which
would just look odd or strange for those familiar with particle physics who
happens to be also interested in parallel processing.

All we need is to *somehow* make (the symptom of) a given heisenbug be
reliably reproduced. And those "somehow"s are the theme of this section.

So, I'd suggest 1) fixing the definition of heisenbug, 2) departing from
the analogy of particle physics. One problem is what name to use instead of
anti-heisenbug. If you use "anti-" as in "antibiotics", anti-heisenbug
is not necessarily confusing.

Or you might be able to come up with a better analogy by looking into studies
in quantum measurement such as "weak measurement". This field is related to
quantum computing you are planning to include into perfbook.

See e.g. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta

This is a review paper written from experimenters' POV, and should be easier
to read than theoretical papers cited therein, I suppose.

                              Thanks, Akira

> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
>>                         Thanks, Akira
>>
>> --8<-->8--
>> >From cdf227d76d6ec3b40f2dfd6f1a55aba7a1e1bb49 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
>> Date: Wed, 3 May 2017 16:40:15 +0900
>> Subject: [PATCH] debugging: Add footnote on the use of 'anti-heisenbug'
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  debugging/debugging.tex | 6 +++++-
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
>> index e621ebd..146c696 100644
>> --- a/debugging/debugging.tex
>> +++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
>> @@ -1386,7 +1386,11 @@ causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
>>  If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
>>  logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
>>  Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
>> -Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
>> +Why not create an anti-heisenbug\footnote{
>> +	Here, we'll use ``anti-heisenbug'' to denote whatever means
>> +	which would help us track down a given heisenbug, rather than
>> +	its counterpart in a scrict sense of particle physics.}
>> +to annihilate the heisenbug?
>>
>>  This section describes a number of ways to do just that:
>>
>> -- 
>> 2.7.4
>>
>>
> 
> 

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 09:23:03AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2017/05/03 07:59:48 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:14:57PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >> On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>>> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>>>> Hi Paul,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
> >>>>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
> >>>>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
> >>>>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
> >>>>> the heisenbug.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
> >>>>> with this usage.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
> >>>>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
> >>>>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
> >>>>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
> >>>>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
> >>>>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
> >>>>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
> >>>>> something else) is being tracked down.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
> >>>>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
> >>>>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
> >>>>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
> >>>>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
> >>>> But you might be able to see my point here.
> >>>>
> >>>> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
> >>>> done with whatever issue you are working on.
> >>>
> >>> I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
> >>
> >> So, what about adding a footnote like this?
> > 
> > That isn't bad at all!
> > 
> > But let's take a look at several possible approaches:
> > 
> > o	Continue using "anti-heisenbug", but remove the current definition.
> > 	(To the extent that it could be considered to be a definition.)
> > 
> > o	Use the following analogy:
> > 
> > 		When you annihilate an electron and a positron, you don't
> > 		get nothingness, you instead get an energetic photon.
> > 		Similarly, when you annihilate a heisenbug and an
> > 		anti-heisenbug, you don't (usually) get nothingness,
> > 		instead, you get a (hopefully) easier-to-locate bug.
> > 
> > o	The solution you propose below.
> > 
> > o	Leave as is, and assume that people will get the "poetic license".
> > 
> > o	Additional ideas here!
> > 
> > o	Any of the above, but have a quick quiz on the definition
> > 	instead of a footnote or an inline definition/explanation.
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> I looked around the use of "heisenbug" and found an entry in quora:
> 
> https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
> 
> What "heisenbug" should imply is the "observer effect", not the "uncertainty principle".
> 
> So the definition of heisenbug given in the text is already confusing.

That may be, but I wasn't the one who defined heisenbug.  ;-)

But given that it is defined, and given that a very large number of people
are very scared of heisenbugs, it is my job to reduce, preferably remove,
the fear.  Less fear is needed so that they can better deal with the
heisenbugs that they will inevitably come across.

> An example of observer effect in quantum mechanics is interference of
> electron beam passing through double slit.
> If you don't know which slit each electron passes, you can observe interference
> pattern. But once you put some equipment to know which slit an individual
> electron passes, you no longer see the interference pattern.
> 
> This situation is much relevant to heisenbug, isn't it?

Well, it actually -might- be possible to come up with a heisenbug that
mimicked quantum superpositioning and entanglement, but I don't know of
one right offhand.  Actually, it -has- to be possible to generate such a
heisenbug because we can simulate quantum systems with software.  Whether
or not such a heisenbug would actually occur naturally, I couldn't say.
Seems a bit unlikely, but then again, so did RCU.  ;-)

> Heisenberg used observer effect to explain his uncertainty principle as
> a thought experiment on the gamma-ray microscope.
> This is the origin of the confusion. And most people are still confused.
> 
> So I don't like to see further analogies with misleading implications, which
> would just look odd or strange for those familiar with particle physics who
> happens to be also interested in parallel processing.

The readers need to laugh enough, be confused enough, or whatever, in order
to let go of their fear.

> All we need is to *somehow* make (the symptom of) a given heisenbug be
> reliably reproduced. And those "somehow"s are the theme of this section.

That is true!

> So, I'd suggest 1) fixing the definition of heisenbug, 2) departing from
> the analogy of particle physics. One problem is what name to use instead of
> anti-heisenbug. If you use "anti-" as in "antibiotics", anti-heisenbug
> is not necessarily confusing.

I am not at all optimistic about being able to fix the definition
of heisenbug.  It has been in use for far too long.

> Or you might be able to come up with a better analogy by looking into studies
> in quantum measurement such as "weak measurement". This field is related to
> quantum computing you are planning to include into perfbook.
> 
> See e.g. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
> 
> This is a review paper written from experimenters' POV, and should be easier
> to read than theoretical papers cited therein, I suppose.

But if we have to educate the typical reader about weak measurement, we
have already lost.  We will lose them, and they will retain their
crippling fear of heisenbugs.

How about something like the following patch?

							Thanx, Paul

----------------------------------------------------------------------

commit 50d1f21f54540ff6ec38cc44715c213c3e16f2fe
Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Sun May 7 20:46:19 2017 -0700

    debugging: Add footnote stating that "heisenbug" is a misnomer
    
    https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
    http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
    
    But the word is well entrenched in common usage in parallel programming.
    
    Reported-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
    Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
index e621ebdb540b..c41057f35c31 100644
--- a/debugging/debugging.tex
+++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
@@ -1370,23 +1370,30 @@ The next section discusses counter-intuitive ways of improving this situation.

 This line of thought also helps explain heisenbugs:
 adding tracing and assertions can easily reduce the probability
-of a bug appearing.
-And this is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
+of a bug appearing, which
+is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
 so critically important.

-The name ``heisenbug'' stems from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
-from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to exactly
-quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given point
-in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
+The term ``heisenbug'' was inspired by the Heisenberg Uncertainty
+Principle from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to
+exactly quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given
+point in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
 Any attempt to more accurately measure that particle's position will
 result in increased uncertainty of its velocity.
-A similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down the heisenbug
-causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
+A roughly similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down
+the heisenbug causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear
+completely.\footnote{
+	The term ``heisenbug'' is a misnomer, as most heisenbugs are
+	fully explained by the \emph{observer effect} from classical
+	physics.
+	Nevertheless, the name ``heisenbug'' has stuck.}

 If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
-logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
+logical that the field of physics should inspire the solution.
 Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
 Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
+Or, perhaps more accurately, to annihilate the heisen-ness of
+the heisenbug?

 This section describes a number of ways to do just that:

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Akira Yokosawa]

On 2017/05/07 20:50:15 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 09:23:03AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>> On 2017/05/03 07:59:48 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:14:57PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>>> On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>>>>> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Paul,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
>>>>>>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
>>>>>>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
>>>>>>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
>>>>>>> the heisenbug.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
>>>>>>> with this usage.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
>>>>>>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
>>>>>>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
>>>>>>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
>>>>>>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
>>>>>>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
>>>>>>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
>>>>>>> something else) is being tracked down.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
>>>>>>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
>>>>>>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
>>>>>>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
>>>>>>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
>>>>>> But you might be able to see my point here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
>>>>>> done with whatever issue you are working on.
>>>>>
>>>>> I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
>>>>
>>>> So, what about adding a footnote like this?
>>>
>>> That isn't bad at all!
>>>
>>> But let's take a look at several possible approaches:
>>>
>>> o	Continue using "anti-heisenbug", but remove the current definition.
>>> 	(To the extent that it could be considered to be a definition.)
>>>
>>> o	Use the following analogy:
>>>
>>> 		When you annihilate an electron and a positron, you don't
>>> 		get nothingness, you instead get an energetic photon.
>>> 		Similarly, when you annihilate a heisenbug and an
>>> 		anti-heisenbug, you don't (usually) get nothingness,
>>> 		instead, you get a (hopefully) easier-to-locate bug.
>>>
>>> o	The solution you propose below.
>>>
>>> o	Leave as is, and assume that people will get the "poetic license".
>>>
>>> o	Additional ideas here!
>>>
>>> o	Any of the above, but have a quick quiz on the definition
>>> 	instead of a footnote or an inline definition/explanation.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I looked around the use of "heisenbug" and found an entry in quora:
>>
>> https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
>>
>> What "heisenbug" should imply is the "observer effect", not the "uncertainty principle".
>>
>> So the definition of heisenbug given in the text is already confusing.
> 
> That may be, but I wasn't the one who defined heisenbug.  ;-)
> 
> But given that it is defined, and given that a very large number of people
> are very scared of heisenbugs, it is my job to reduce, preferably remove,
> the fear.  Less fear is needed so that they can better deal with the
> heisenbugs that they will inevitably come across.
> 
>> An example of observer effect in quantum mechanics is interference of
>> electron beam passing through double slit.
>> If you don't know which slit each electron passes, you can observe interference
>> pattern. But once you put some equipment to know which slit an individual
>> electron passes, you no longer see the interference pattern.
>>
>> This situation is much relevant to heisenbug, isn't it?
> 
> Well, it actually -might- be possible to come up with a heisenbug that
> mimicked quantum superpositioning and entanglement, but I don't know of
> one right offhand.  Actually, it -has- to be possible to generate such a
> heisenbug because we can simulate quantum systems with software.  Whether
> or not such a heisenbug would actually occur naturally, I couldn't say.
> Seems a bit unlikely, but then again, so did RCU.  ;-)

Hmm, hard to imagine...

> 
>> Heisenberg used observer effect to explain his uncertainty principle as
>> a thought experiment on the gamma-ray microscope.
>> This is the origin of the confusion. And most people are still confused.
>>
>> So I don't like to see further analogies with misleading implications, which
>> would just look odd or strange for those familiar with particle physics who
>> happens to be also interested in parallel processing.
> 
> The readers need to laugh enough, be confused enough, or whatever, in order
> to let go of their fear.

;-)

> 
>> All we need is to *somehow* make (the symptom of) a given heisenbug be
>> reliably reproduced. And those "somehow"s are the theme of this section.
> 
> That is true!
> 
>> So, I'd suggest 1) fixing the definition of heisenbug, 2) departing from
>> the analogy of particle physics. One problem is what name to use instead of
>> anti-heisenbug. If you use "anti-" as in "antibiotics", anti-heisenbug
>> is not necessarily confusing.
> 
> I am not at all optimistic about being able to fix the definition
> of heisenbug.  It has been in use for far too long.

And most people are likely to have heard of the uncertainty principle. 

> 
>> Or you might be able to come up with a better analogy by looking into studies
>> in quantum measurement such as "weak measurement". This field is related to
>> quantum computing you are planning to include into perfbook.
>>
>> See e.g. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
>>
>> This is a review paper written from experimenters' POV, and should be easier
>> to read than theoretical papers cited therein, I suppose.
> 
> But if we have to educate the typical reader about weak measurement, we
> have already lost.

Point taken.

>                     We will lose them, and they will retain their
> crippling fear of heisenbugs.
> 
> How about something like the following patch?

Fair enough.

And "heisen-ness" sounds funny enough.

If you want to add,

Acked-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>

                                 Thanks, Akira

> 
> 							Thanx, Paul
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> commit 50d1f21f54540ff6ec38cc44715c213c3e16f2fe
> Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Date:   Sun May 7 20:46:19 2017 -0700
> 
>     debugging: Add footnote stating that "heisenbug" is a misnomer
>     
>     https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
>     http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
>     
>     But the word is well entrenched in common usage in parallel programming.
>     
>     Reported-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
>     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 
> diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
> index e621ebdb540b..c41057f35c31 100644
> --- a/debugging/debugging.tex
> +++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
> @@ -1370,23 +1370,30 @@ The next section discusses counter-intuitive ways of improving this situation.
>  
>  This line of thought also helps explain heisenbugs:
>  adding tracing and assertions can easily reduce the probability
> -of a bug appearing.
> -And this is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
> +of a bug appearing, which
> +is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
>  so critically important.
>  
> -The name ``heisenbug'' stems from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
> -from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to exactly
> -quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given point
> -in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
> +The term ``heisenbug'' was inspired by the Heisenberg Uncertainty
> +Principle from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to
> +exactly quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given
> +point in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
>  Any attempt to more accurately measure that particle's position will
>  result in increased uncertainty of its velocity.
> -A similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down the heisenbug
> -causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
> +A roughly similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down
> +the heisenbug causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear
> +completely.\footnote{
> +	The term ``heisenbug'' is a misnomer, as most heisenbugs are
> +	fully explained by the \emph{observer effect} from classical
> +	physics.
> +	Nevertheless, the name ``heisenbug'' has stuck.}
>  
>  If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
> -logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
> +logical that the field of physics should inspire the solution.
>  Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
>  Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> +Or, perhaps more accurately, to annihilate the heisen-ness of
> +the heisenbug?
>  
>  This section describes a number of ways to do just that:
>  
> 
> 

Re: [Q] Heisenbug and anti-heisenbug

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 12:06:29AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> On 2017/05/07 20:50:15 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sun, May 07, 2017 at 09:23:03AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >> On 2017/05/03 07:59:48 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 05:14:57PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>>> On 2017/05/02 19:47:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:23:11AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2017/05/03 09:09:37 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Paul,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> While reviewing your recent update in "Hunting Heisenbugs" section,
> >>>>>>> I found the analogy with particle physics didn't sit well with me.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Heisenbug" is defined as:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> attempts to track down the heisenbug causes it to radically change
> >>>>>>>> its symptoms or even disappear completely. 
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "Anti-heisenbug" is introduced as:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task: Why not create
> >>>>>>>> an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> At this point, "anti-heisenbug" seems to mean a patch that fixes
> >>>>>>> the heisenbug.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The use of anti-something in particle physics does not go along
> >>>>>>> with this usage.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For example, antiproton is an antiparticle of proton.
> >>>>>>> antiproton has mostly the same property as proton,
> >>>>>>> with the exception of electric charge and magnetic moment.
> >>>>>>> Also, an antiproton and an antielectron (positron) can compose
> >>>>>>> an antihydrogen atom. Well, I'm sure you know all about this.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So, if you employ this line of reasoning, an anti-heisenbug should
> >>>>>>> also be a bug with something opposite in nature.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If a heisenbug is a bug which vanishes when it is being tracked down,
> >>>>>>> an anti-heisenbug would be a bug which only emerges when it (or 
> >>>>>>> something else) is being tracked down.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> However, it is not obvious you can create an anti-heisenbug for
> >>>>>>> a particular heisenbug so that when the two are combined, the symptoms
> >>>>>>> of both bugs to "annihilate".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So I'm wondering "What was Paul's intention in using the word 'annihilate'?".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> In Section "Add Delay", anti-heisenbug is used as:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Once you spot a bug involving a race condition, it is frequently
> >>>>>>>> possible to create an anti-heisenbug by adding delay in this manner.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This "anti-heisenbug" is not a bug, rather, it is a means to increase
> >>>>>>> the possibility of a given heisenbug to appear. 
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Oops, I sent this prematurely.
> >>>>>> But you might be able to see my point here.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is not an important question, so please give it a look when you have
> >>>>>> done with whatever issue you are working on.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I freely admit that I am taking a fair amount of "poetic license" here.  ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>> So, what about adding a footnote like this?
> >>>
> >>> That isn't bad at all!
> >>>
> >>> But let's take a look at several possible approaches:
> >>>
> >>> o	Continue using "anti-heisenbug", but remove the current definition.
> >>> 	(To the extent that it could be considered to be a definition.)
> >>>
> >>> o	Use the following analogy:
> >>>
> >>> 		When you annihilate an electron and a positron, you don't
> >>> 		get nothingness, you instead get an energetic photon.
> >>> 		Similarly, when you annihilate a heisenbug and an
> >>> 		anti-heisenbug, you don't (usually) get nothingness,
> >>> 		instead, you get a (hopefully) easier-to-locate bug.
> >>>
> >>> o	The solution you propose below.
> >>>
> >>> o	Leave as is, and assume that people will get the "poetic license".
> >>>
> >>> o	Additional ideas here!
> >>>
> >>> o	Any of the above, but have a quick quiz on the definition
> >>> 	instead of a footnote or an inline definition/explanation.
> >>>
> >>> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> I looked around the use of "heisenbug" and found an entry in quora:
> >>
> >> https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
> >>
> >> What "heisenbug" should imply is the "observer effect", not the "uncertainty principle".
> >>
> >> So the definition of heisenbug given in the text is already confusing.
> > 
> > That may be, but I wasn't the one who defined heisenbug.  ;-)
> > 
> > But given that it is defined, and given that a very large number of people
> > are very scared of heisenbugs, it is my job to reduce, preferably remove,
> > the fear.  Less fear is needed so that they can better deal with the
> > heisenbugs that they will inevitably come across.
> > 
> >> An example of observer effect in quantum mechanics is interference of
> >> electron beam passing through double slit.
> >> If you don't know which slit each electron passes, you can observe interference
> >> pattern. But once you put some equipment to know which slit an individual
> >> electron passes, you no longer see the interference pattern.
> >>
> >> This situation is much relevant to heisenbug, isn't it?
> > 
> > Well, it actually -might- be possible to come up with a heisenbug that
> > mimicked quantum superpositioning and entanglement, but I don't know of
> > one right offhand.  Actually, it -has- to be possible to generate such a
> > heisenbug because we can simulate quantum systems with software.  Whether
> > or not such a heisenbug would actually occur naturally, I couldn't say.
> > Seems a bit unlikely, but then again, so did RCU.  ;-)
> 
> Hmm, hard to imagine...

So was RCU.  ;-)

> >> Heisenberg used observer effect to explain his uncertainty principle as
> >> a thought experiment on the gamma-ray microscope.
> >> This is the origin of the confusion. And most people are still confused.
> >>
> >> So I don't like to see further analogies with misleading implications, which
> >> would just look odd or strange for those familiar with particle physics who
> >> happens to be also interested in parallel processing.
> > 
> > The readers need to laugh enough, be confused enough, or whatever, in order
> > to let go of their fear.
> 
> ;-)
> 
> > 
> >> All we need is to *somehow* make (the symptom of) a given heisenbug be
> >> reliably reproduced. And those "somehow"s are the theme of this section.
> > 
> > That is true!
> > 
> >> So, I'd suggest 1) fixing the definition of heisenbug, 2) departing from
> >> the analogy of particle physics. One problem is what name to use instead of
> >> anti-heisenbug. If you use "anti-" as in "antibiotics", anti-heisenbug
> >> is not necessarily confusing.
> > 
> > I am not at all optimistic about being able to fix the definition
> > of heisenbug.  It has been in use for far too long.
> 
> And most people are likely to have heard of the uncertainty principle. 

Exactly!

> >> Or you might be able to come up with a better analogy by looking into studies
> >> in quantum measurement such as "weak measurement". This field is related to
> >> quantum computing you are planning to include into perfbook.
> >>
> >> See e.g. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
> >>
> >> This is a review paper written from experimenters' POV, and should be easier
> >> to read than theoretical papers cited therein, I suppose.
> > 
> > But if we have to educate the typical reader about weak measurement, we
> > have already lost.
> 
> Point taken.
> 
> >                     We will lose them, and they will retain their
> > crippling fear of heisenbugs.
> > 
> > How about something like the following patch?
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> And "heisen-ness" sounds funny enough.
> 
> If you want to add,
> 
> Acked-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>

Added and pushed, thank you!

							Thanx, Paul

>                                  Thanks, Akira
> 
> > 
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > commit 50d1f21f54540ff6ec38cc44715c213c3e16f2fe
> > Author: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Date:   Sun May 7 20:46:19 2017 -0700
> > 
> >     debugging: Add footnote stating that "heisenbug" is a misnomer
> >     
> >     https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-mix-up-the-observer-effect-and-the-uncertainty-principle
> >     http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001/meta
> >     
> >     But the word is well entrenched in common usage in parallel programming.
> >     
> >     Reported-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@gmail.com>
> >     Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/debugging/debugging.tex b/debugging/debugging.tex
> > index e621ebdb540b..c41057f35c31 100644
> > --- a/debugging/debugging.tex
> > +++ b/debugging/debugging.tex
> > @@ -1370,23 +1370,30 @@ The next section discusses counter-intuitive ways of improving this situation.
> >  
> >  This line of thought also helps explain heisenbugs:
> >  adding tracing and assertions can easily reduce the probability
> > -of a bug appearing.
> > -And this is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
> > +of a bug appearing, which
> > +is why extremely lightweight tracing and assertion mechanism are
> >  so critically important.
> >  
> > -The name ``heisenbug'' stems from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
> > -from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to exactly
> > -quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given point
> > -in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
> > +The term ``heisenbug'' was inspired by the Heisenberg Uncertainty
> > +Principle from quantum physics, which states that it is impossible to
> > +exactly quantify a given particle's position and velocity at any given
> > +point in time~\cite{WeinerHeisenberg1927Uncertain}.
> >  Any attempt to more accurately measure that particle's position will
> >  result in increased uncertainty of its velocity.
> > -A similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down the heisenbug
> > -causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear completely.
> > +A roughly similar effect occurs for heisenbugs: attempts to track down
> > +the heisenbug causes it to radically change its symptoms or even disappear
> > +completely.\footnote{
> > +	The term ``heisenbug'' is a misnomer, as most heisenbugs are
> > +	fully explained by the \emph{observer effect} from classical
> > +	physics.
> > +	Nevertheless, the name ``heisenbug'' has stuck.}
> >  
> >  If the field of physics inspired the name of this problem, it is only
> > -logical that we should look to the field of physics for the solution.
> > +logical that the field of physics should inspire the solution.
> >  Fortunately, particle physics is up to the task:
> >  Why not create an anti-heisenbug to annihilate the heisenbug?
> > +Or, perhaps more accurately, to annihilate the heisen-ness of
> > +the heisenbug?
> >  
> >  This section describes a number of ways to do just that:
> >  
> > 
> > 
>