Created attachment 7657 [details]
adds g_queue_remove() and g_queue_remove_all()

What's the objective criterion for deciding what additional
functions get added to GQueue? Why these two in particular?

I needed these two functions in particular, but I don't know the
objective criterion for which functions get added. (And I don't care
that much for these two functions).

Does the patch really handle the case where the node
removed is the tail correctly?

No it doesn't. It needs to update the tail pointer.

Assuming that we don't add GRing and deprecate GQueue, I
think it probably makes sense to complete GQueue to have
a full GList/GSList equivalent API set.

Some discussion in 
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2003-September/msg00240.html

Created attachment 20415 [details] [review]
patch

Created attachment 20503 [details] [review]
New patch

i'm not particularly fond of adding the new API here. for one, i don't
rule out addition of GRing in the future, since from my experience it
offers a far supperior API to GQueue. for another, i'd like to see
this new API get some discussion on gtk-devel-list prior to inclusion.
on the technical side, the implementation has some issues, it should
make better use of existing g_list API (e.g. to access the nth
element) which had several validation passes for correctness already,
and to make use of improvements/optimizations in that code (e.g.
g_list_free() is O(1) for n elements, while queue_remove_all is not).

Tim, the GRing bug has been WONTFIXed.


The gtk-devel-list discussion is linked above. 


Do you want it discussed once more ? 

For reference, bug 59431 is the original GRing proposal, and


http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2002-November/msg00097.
html 


is Owens rationale for WONTFIXing it.

thanks for the links matthias. yes, i intend to resurrect a GRing
discussion in the future, basically because i don't agree with owen's
rationale. i just haven't found the time to reply to that, and it
looks like GRing stays somewhat low on my priority queue for still
some time, since there're lots of other more pressing issues that
require my attention.

I have committed this. See

http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2004-February/msg00129.html

for an explanation.