/** Timeout for process destruction in milliseconds. */
        private final long timeout;

        /**
         * Constructor for ProcessDestroyer.
         * @param p The process to monitor.
         * @param ist The input stream thread.
         * @param timeout The destruction timeout.
         */

     */
    public Set<String> getRunningSessionIdSet() {
        return runningProcessMap.keySet();
    }

    /**
     * Sets the timeout for process destruction.
     *
     * @param processDestroyTimeout timeout in seconds for process destruction
     */
    public void setProcessDestroyTimeout(final int processDestroyTimeout) {
        this.processDestroyTimeout = processDestroyTimeout;
    }

    /**

            // Wait a bit for the processes to start
            Thread.sleep(50);

            // Destroy all processes
            processHelper.destroy();

            // Wait a bit for destruction to complete
            Thread.sleep(100);

            assertFalse(processHelper.isProcessRunning());
        } catch (Exception e) {
            fail("Unexpected exception: " + e.getMessage());
        }

	go f()
}
</pre>

<p>
calling <code>hello</code> will print <code>"hello, world"</code>
at some point in the future (perhaps after <code>hello</code> has returned).
</p>

<h3 id="goexit">Goroutine destruction</h3>

<p>
The exit of a goroutine is not guaranteed to be synchronized before
any event in the program.
For example, in this program:
</p>

<pre>
var a string

func hello() {

        List<Restriction> restrictions = range.getRestrictions();
        assertEquals(1, restrictions.size(), CHECK_NUM_RESTRICTIONS);
        Restriction restriction = restrictions.get(0);
        assertNull(restriction.getLowerBound(), CHECK_LOWER_BOUND);
        assertFalse(restriction.isLowerBoundInclusive(), CHECK_LOWER_BOUND_INCLUSIVE);
        assertEquals("1.0", restriction.getUpperBound().toString(), CHECK_UPPER_BOUND);

    }

    private List<Restriction> intersection(List<Restriction> r1, List<Restriction> r2) {
        List<Restriction> restrictions = new ArrayList<>(r1.size() + r2.size());
        Iterator<Restriction> i1 = r1.iterator();
        Iterator<Restriction> i2 = r2.iterator();
        Restriction res1 = i1.next();
        Restriction res2 = i2.next();

        boolean done = false;

    private final Range<C> restriction;

    SubRangeSet(Range<C> restriction) {
      super(
          new SubRangeSetRangesByLowerBound<C>(
              Range.<Cut<C>>all(), restriction, TreeRangeSet.this.rangesByLowerBound));
      this.restriction = restriction;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean encloses(Range<C> range) {
      if (!restriction.isEmpty() && restriction.encloses(range)) {

Instead, the compiler operates on a kind of semi-abstract instruction set,
and instruction selection occurs partly after code generation.
The assembler works on the semi-abstract form, so
when you see an instruction like <code>MOV</code>
what the toolchain actually generates for that operation might
not be a move instruction at all, perhaps a clear or load.
Or it might correspond exactly to the machine instruction with that name.

		}
		p.errorf("wrong number of arguments to %s instruction", op)
		return
	case 4:
		if p.arch.Family == sys.S390X || p.arch.Family == sys.PPC64 {
			// 4-operand compare-and-branch.
			prog.From = a[0]
			prog.Reg = p.getRegister(prog, op, &a[1])
			prog.AddRestSource(a[2])
			target = &a[3]
			break
		}
		p.errorf("wrong number of arguments to %s instruction", op)
		return
	default:

const (
	RFP = -(iota + 1)
	RSB
	RSP
	RPC
)

// Arch wraps the link architecture object with more architecture-specific information.
type Arch struct {
	*obj.LinkArch
	// Map of instruction names to enumeration.
	Instructions map[string]obj.As
	// Map of register names to enumeration.
	Register map[string]int16
	// Table of register prefix names. These are things like R for R(0) and SPR for SPR(268).