Re: Q. aboutMutableFileSet

Svata Dedic wrote:

> Svata Dedic wrote:
>
>> events during each operation. Without at least move(), it is not 
>> feasible to reorder fileset's contents without outside world 
>> observing the fileset in an inconsistent (== without all the 
>> elements) content.
>>
> An afterthought, probably more useful:
> In Registry API, a lock over the structure is available for clients. 
> If MutableFileSet allows its owner (who creates the instance) to lock 
> the FileSets for the length of modification, supressing event flow, it 
> may remove quite a few deadlocks: subsequent modifications are often 
> done from synchronzied sections for data consistency reasons.

I think that supressing event flow during modifications should be 
enough. At least it seems to be enough when working with FileSystems, e.g.:

FS.runAtomic {
    synchronized(xyz) {
        FS.modify_and_fire_events();
    }
}

Events are fired when leaving the atomic action section which is already 
outside the synchronization.

-vita