From: davlet_panech (davlet_panech_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-01 09:58:44
--- In boost_at_y..., "Dale Peakall" <dale.peakall_at_b...> wrote:
> I thought that we'd sort of decided that what we were writing here
> was a TCP/IP library, not sockets in the more general sense.
> If you're going to start going down the multi-protocol route, then
> things really start getting complex.
I don't think we are going to support anything besides TCP (and
possibly UDP), all I'm saying we should try to keep our design
flexible to allow for extensions.
> Things are complex enough as they are. Do you try and support
> asynchronous communications?
Some people fell strongly about supporting async operations (although
I personally do not mind dropping this).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk