Re: review of the Storage interface

[Miguel de Icaza <miguel helixcode com>]

> 	  I am extremely concerned that your suggestions are extensive and I
> do not understand why many of them are neccessary. What application do you
> have in mind for eg. locking, content types on storages etc. etc. Why are
> these neccessary to your mind ? MS manage to cope without this
> functionality and the interface is currently nice and thin. 

I believe the Microsoft interfaces does have locking, I need to check
to make sure.  But if anything, it looks like a good addition.

The only thing I would like to see is a sample set of library calls
that we ship that would simplify implementing the locking bits for
those programmers that just want to get the "default" behaviour for
locking.

Say, a GLocking object:

GLock       *g_locking_new ();
GLockError   g_locking_add_lock (GLock *g, int start_byte, int end_byte);
GLockError   g_locking_unlock   (GLock *g, int start_byte, int end_byte);

gboolean     g_locking_is_range_locked (GLock *g, int start_byte, int end_byte);

(not complete, nor precise, nor anything close, but you get the idea).

Miguel.