Timeout with value zero has different behaviour in C and Cpp

[Rodario]

I have ported missing tests from the Cpp to C target and happened on a "bug" in one of them.
The test in question is the TimoutZero test..
My implementation looks like this.

The "bug" is more of a implementation question it seems. A timeout of 0 in Cpp is handled as if there is no timeout where in C there is a termination after the 0th step.
I talked with @cmnrd about this and we wanted to ask, whats the correct behavior here?

[Soroosh129]

Others might want to explain the requirements of the language.

However, from a practical standpoint, is there a way to stop the program at tag (0,0) in the Cpp target?

[cmnrd]

Yes, absolutely. Actually, the C++ runtime does not implement a timeout. Instead, the code generator simply injects a timeout reactor that sets a timer and it's reaction requests to stop the execution. In principle, the delay could be zero.

However, the issue at hand is the interpretation of zero. In C++, a timeout of zero is interpreted as invalid and hence there is no timeout. This is very convenient when using the CLI arguments. We can simply write --timout 0 to disable a timeout.

How does the C runtime handle this? Which value has timeout if there is no timout configured?

[Soroosh129]

Instead, the code generator simply injects a timeout reactor that sets a timer and it's reaction requests to stop the execution.

I don't see how with this implementation, a stop tag of (0,0) could be achieved. A request_stop() call should stop the program at least one microstep later.

Which value has timeout if there is no timout configured?

I don't understand this question. Do you mean what the default timeout is? It is infinity by default (or FOREVER to be specific).