Re: [boost] singleton asio::demuxer as default? (was: asioformalreview begins)

From: Eugene Alterman (eugalt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-20 00:39:17

"Peter Petrov" <ppetrov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:do81b5$4ir$1_at_sea.gmane.org...
> Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
>> That should not be difficult to achieve with derivation or some sort of
>> policy.  Looks like async_socket might be derived from sync_socket (or
>> contain it).
>
> This was also my thought - public derivation. I.e., the current socket
> class is refactored into two classes - base (sync_socket) and and
> derived (async_socket). The sync_socket class won't know anyhing about
> demuxers (it doesn't need to).

Except that demuxer is currently also a service repository.
And wouldn't the service repository if decoupled from a demuxer be a 
legitimate candidate for a singleton?