Re: MV Keys
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 00:02:29 +0100
Message-ID: <4408caa6$0$11075$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
> For sure.
>
>
> Absolutely. Multi-user or even just multi-thread use introduces
> a host of (annoying) concurrency issues.
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 00:02:29 +0100
Message-ID: <4408caa6$0$11075$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Marshall Spight wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
>>Aside (the example surely illustrates your point) >>could this removeAt operation possibly be useful >>in a concurrent environment?
>
> For sure.
I don't (yet? :-) see how it can be useful etc. by itself. A little namechange to emphasize the multi-somethingness:
OurSharedList.removeAt(index) has more serious
sharing problems than, say:
OurSharedList.removeItem(item)
ISTM the index loses its meaning when I'm not in sole control of the list.
Hmm... OurSharedList.insertafter(hopefullyexisting item, new item)
>>You'ld never know which item you are going to scratch - >>somebody else could have just done myList.removeAt(2).
>
>
> Absolutely. Multi-user or even just multi-thread use introduces
> a host of (annoying) concurrency issues.
I wanted to get you interested, not annoyed ;-) Received on Sat Mar 04 2006 - 00:02:29 CET