At Thu, 13 Jan 2011 17:29:15 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote: > 30 minutes ago, Matthew Flatt wrote: > > > > Unfortunately (again), the lock file has to exist alongside the data > > file, and our existing preferences files are not accompanied by lock > > files. It's no good assuming that you don't need the lock if there's > > no lock file present, because the lock file might get created in > > between the time that you try to use the lock file and the time that > > you try to open the preferences file. > > Why not always use such a lock file, creating it if it's not there -- > and then you can open it once per process, and lock/unlock it for each > read/write of the actual file. Does this fail somehow?
That's a good idea. It's a little bit of option 1, in that a reader will sometimes need to write a file --- but only in the transitional case of dealing with an existing preference file without a lock file. _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
