What does Chris think about this?
Chris has been using Asio in production code for something like 15 years. It processes billions of transactions per day in financial exchanges around the world.
It is demonstrably excellent at what it was designed to do, which is to process a large number of messages while fairly sharing communications resources across all connections.
From my point of view the meddling by WG21 is most unwelcome as it serves to destabilise the interface of Asio, which is confusing for users of Asio and Beast, and also implementers of dependent libraries - who I regularly coach. The jumps from boost 1.69 to 1.70 (executors TS) and from 1.73 to 1.74 (unified executors) have been particularly problematic.
As far as I am able to tell from attending some of the meetings, the motivation for changes amongst certain actors in WG21 seems to me to be driven by either malice or willful ignorance of the impact on the user community.
Of course like many boost libraries, it should already have been standardised without the butchering.
As things stand, it seems to me that the whole process of standardising networking is so infected with self interest and externalisation of costs, that the enterprise is probably doomed. No doubt this is intended by a small cadre of participants.
He is arguably been open to changes
to Networking TS. Why don't you aim directly for such a "Networking
v2", maybe for C++26 (by now I don't mind waiting another 3 years),
and skip "Networking V1"?
I am not going to pretend to get the details, but I understand there
are a lot of more or less related moving parts (executors, io_uring,
GCD, continuations...). So if it gets delayed so be it, we already
have ASIO for the time being. But in 2021 work on trying to get
something in C++23 with the idea of deprecating it on C++26 sounds...
strange.
_______________________________________________
Boost-users mailing list
Boost-users@lists.boost.org
https://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users