Re: Non-blocking I/O

From: tom.widmer_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-03-07 07:09:53

--- In boost_at_y..., "Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_c...> wrote:
> 
> 
> Lois Goldthwaite wrote:

> .political_commentary on
> From my perspective, for C++ to move forward we need to stop asking 
why we can't
> do something on every platform and start looking at how to provide 
essential
> things on as many platforms as possible.  The JAVA folks have done 
this well and
> JAVA is flourishing as a result.  Clearly, they have learned to 
live with
> subsets of standard libraries for devices that won't run GUI's, for 
example.
> C++ could easily do the same...

I completely disagree. The C++ libraries need to remain small enough 
that new iterations can be produced as fast as language ones are. 
Also, ISO C++ is theoretically as portable as C (and with Greg 
Comeau's help practically), and I see no reason to change that.

What we need if for some people to form a new standards body to come 
up with a new standard for, say, a C++ binding of POSIX, that is 
easily ported to any platform that supports a C POSIX binding and a 
ISO compliant C++ compiler. Ideally, a Win32 port would be possible. 
All the realtime POSIX extensions would be designed in from the 
start, though not required (especially since I use a realtime OS :)

Perhaps this what a group of the boost people could be doing, rather 
than working relatively independently on a hotch potch of reasonably 
portable libraries?

> .political_commentary off

Tom