Re: Do we need a ShmList implementation?

Simon Riggs  wrote:
> My understanding is that we used to have that and it was removed
> for the reasons Heikki states. There are still vestigial bits
> still in code.
> 
> Not exactly impressed with the SHM_QUEUE stuff though, so I
> appreciate the sentiment that Kevin expresses.
So, if I just allocated a fixed memory space to provide an API
similar to my previous post, does that sound reasonable to you?  For
the record, my intention would be to hide the SHM_QUEUE structures
in this API -- an entry would be just the structure you're
interested in working with.  If practical, I would prefer for
ShmList to be a pointer to an opaque structure; users of this
shouldn't really be exposed to or depend upon the implementation.
-Kevin