test13.pepa - highlights a bug, but not a "no more events" kind:

[fetching a token eof]
Found brackets
Found coop
proc first rule is txn1 <{reqlock12, reqlock11, writelock12, writelock11}> lockm
gr1 || lockmgr2
[fetching a token eof]
Process was txn1 <{reqlock12, reqlock11, writelock12, writelock11}> lockmgr1 || 
lockmgr2
action equality
adding 1
adding 1
action equality
action equality
returning pepa.process.Rate$Spec@80cb629
action equality
returning 0
action equality
returning pepa.process.Rate$Unspec@80cba2e
action equality
returning 0



Weird? Once main bug is tracked down, work out what this is.


test7.pepa to test14.pepa are narrowing down the no more events bug

test18.pepa is best

The bug is that when a sync action appears second in the list of
actions on which to sync, it's not taken properly. This is part of the 
whole priority selection code which isn't in place, so no wonder.

e.g.

(f,1) <f,g> ((g,T) || (f,2T))

it doesn't spot that it can sync with the second activity, an f, cause 
the g is also enabled.




THINGS TO TEST
--------------

o looping back to oneself immediately works P = a.P - canon1.pepa
o a simple sync works (no coop) - canon2.pepa
o a simple coop works (one activity) - canon3.pepa
o a coop after two individual activities by two processes, where one
  side of the coop fires first, but must wait for the other which is
  slower - canon3.pepa
o a coop after two individual activities by two processes, where one
  side of the coop would fire before even the other side is enabled -
  canon3.pepa
o probabilistic selection of passives - canon4.pepa



o passives, especially prob selection of passives
o what happens if a choice happens over a sync which wouldn't have
  been enabled in the first place cause the sync wouldn't have allowed 
  it? e.g. ((a,2) + (b,2)) <a,b> (b,T)
  if the a is taken, the process should NOT evolve - but luckily it
  won't.

      Name                    Last modified      Size  Description
papmmodel-nonexp.pepa 1999-02-22 10:24 7.6K papmmodel-exp.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 7.5K papmmodel.pepa 1999-02-15 12:01 7.5K papmmodelsmall-nonex..> 1999-02-22 10:24 3.5K papmmodelsmall-exp.pepa 1999-02-22 10:24 3.5K papmmodelsmall.pepa 1999-02-22 10:24 3.5K papmmodel-smaller-no..> 1999-02-22 10:24 3.3K papmmodel-smaller-ex..> 1999-02-22 10:24 3.3K test7.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 2.8K test9.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 2.3K papmmodel2-nonexp.pepa 1999-02-22 10:24 2.3K papmmodel2-exp.pepa 1999-02-22 10:24 2.3K test10.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 2.2K test11.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 1.6K test8.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 1.5K test12.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 1.5K test13.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 1.4K test14.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 1.4K bug2.pepa 1999-01-26 22:02 432 bug1.pepa 1999-01-26 21:43 290 test15.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 280 test16.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 273 test17.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 240 tools.pepa 1999-05-24 16:07 211 test18.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 148 test6.pepa 1999-02-16 10:38 138 java11.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 118 canon4.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 95 java5.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 91 canon3.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 89 test.pepa 1999-02-26 14:54 73 java4.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 73 java13.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 69 test19.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 68 java6.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 68 java3.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 67 java2.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 67 java1.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 67 test3.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 65 test1.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 65 java9.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 63 java16.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 62 test5.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 54 java14.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 54 test20.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 49 canon2.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 49 java8.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 48 java10.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 48 test21.pepa 1999-05-14 15:02 43 java12.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 41 test5c.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 36 test22.pepa 1999-05-14 15:02 36 java7.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 36 java15.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 36 test2.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 34 test4.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 30 test4c.pepa 1999-01-25 16:16 27 canon1.pepa 1999-02-20 23:38 18