x wrote:
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
>>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)
>
>
> (insert into OurSharedList(Existing, New)
> select hopefullyexisting item as Existing, new item as New
> from OurSharedList
> where Existing=hopefullyexisting item
> union
> select new item as Existing, New
> from OurSharedList
> where Existing=hopefullyexisting item) ,
> (delete from OurSharedList where Existing=hopefullyexisting item)
I wonder if I understand why you delete the (hopefully) existing
item from OurSharedList (and insert it back in when it was there
originally). Guess: No simpler way to establish wether it's there and
have the query fail when it's not?
Received on Mon Mar 06 2006 - 17:22:16 CST
