Re: [boost] Help with a Sockets library?

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-07-28 12:28:03

At 01:21 PM 7/27/2001, Iain.Hanson_at_[hidden] wrote:

 >     I don't think that socket++ is the best starting point for a sockets 

 >     lib. I would prefer a layered approach where:
 >
 >     Layer 1
 >     Very light weight wrappers to the socket api. This would be mainly 
be
 >     targeted at protocol implementers and would provide platform
 >     independance.
 >
 >     Layer 2
 >     Safe acceptor/ connector classes ? maybe with pluggable marshalling
 >
 >     Layer 3
 >     iostream inteface possibly with searchable buffering.
 >
 >     The main idea being to follow the normal C++ principal of you only 
pay
 >     for what you use and to provide a library suitable for hard 
real-time
 >     protocol developers through to a simple high level interface 
suitable
 >     for relative novices.

I'd also prefer a layered approach.  If layer 1 is primarily a wrapper for 
the sockets API, with as much safety added as possible within that context, 
then a huge amount of current knowledge, books, and so forth will still 
apply.  The only reason I can see for having a layer 1 interface that 
differed markedly from the sockets API would be if it was really markedly 
better.  Just a bit better wouldn't do.

OTOH, layer 2 would seem to offer lots more room for C++ innovation.

--Beman