Re: [PATCH] Added inotify support.

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Stefan Monnier writes:
 > >> > I have no intention to rip out polling.  Rather I hope that the
 > >> > higher-level API we come up with can be implemented by any of Windows's
 > >> > low-level API, inotify, MacOSX's equvalent, or polling.
 > >> ... which is what I hoped to hear.
 > > Plus combinations of the above, as needed.  Right?
 > 
 > If someone bothers to implement it, why not, tho I'm not sure how
 > important that would be

According to nix, inotify is unreliable, end of discussion.

If so, it may make sense to back up inotify with polling, although at
a greatly reduced rate.  Also, files may get moved across filesystems
which support different mechanisms, etc, etc.  So allowing different
files to get notifications in different ways, and perhaps even
changing backends on the fly may be useful/necessary for maximum
reliability.