Igor Stasenko writes:
 > To confirm my point of view, see Morph>>privateAddMorph:atIndex:
 > 
 > It manipulates a submorphs collection without guarding it with semaphore.
 > It really likely that tight loops running in multiple processes may
 > damage collection, especially when you using Delays which enables
 > scheduler to switch processes at any point.
 > Also, i'm sure this is not the only place, where breakage can occur.
 > Morphic is too complex to say something definitely.
 > 
 > To summarize: manipulating morphs using concurrent code is a big no-no :)

The real test doesn't touch morphic. That was just a recreation that
seemed to reproduce the problem without relying on any Exupery code.
The actual test is using ExuperyProfiler which writes results to a
SharedQueue.