[boost] Re: Sockets

From: Boris (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-03-04 19:18:47

Caleb Epstein wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 01:13:58 +0200, Boris <boris_at_[hidden]> wrote:

Caleb, thanks for your comments! There is not much feedback so appreciate 
any comment. I wonder if there's a lack of interest or some resignation as 
the socket stuff is in the Wiki for ages without any progress.

> [...]
> * blocking/nonblocking mode must be selectable at run-time.  Having a
> default selectable at compile time is fine, but not allowing a switch
> at runtime would be too limiting.

You are right, I agree.

> * Don't model sockets on iostreams.  They don't model non-blocking I/O
> correctly (see Jonathan Turkanis's recent posting on the evolution of
> the Boost.Iostreams interfaces).  Simple methods called read and write
> should be sufficient.

I agree again. The operators in class socket are an example to show where 
read- and write-methods will be implemented (whatever they will look like).

> * Server should probably be a factory of sockets.  I don't think
> client and server should be concepts at the root of the hierarchy.

I'll have a look at the net library in Java and .NET. I hope to create UML 
diagrams for these libraries, too. Then we should get an insight into 
differences and possible advantages of their designs. I'll post to this 
newsgroup whenever I update the Wiki.

> * To implement a scalable server-side application there must be
> support for IO multiplexing (e.g. select/poll/etc) and this should be
> considered in the design.

That's what the class multiplexing represents (in namespace 
boost::net::iomodel)?
By the way, what do you think about the .NET way? In .NET there are only two 
models: synchronous and asynchronous. Synchronous is the same as blocking 
but asynchronous depends on the implementation (from multiplexing to 
signal-driven to real asynchronous is everything possible). Does it matter 
to a library user how asynchronous is actually implemented?

> * Picking nits, they are "Berkeley" sockets, not "Berkely".

Thanks, corrected!

Boris