Re: sockets Interface for address class

From: davlet_panech (davlet_panech_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-01 09:58:44

--- In boost_at_y..., "Dale Peakall" <dale.peakall_at_b...> wrote:
> 
> I thought that we'd sort of decided that what we were writing here
> was a TCP/IP library, not sockets in the more general sense.
> 
> If you're going to start going down the multi-protocol route, then 
> things really start getting complex.
> 

I don't think we are going to support anything besides TCP (and 
possibly UDP), all I'm saying we should try to keep our design 
flexible to allow for extensions.

> Things are complex enough as they are.  Do you try and support
> asynchronous communications?  

Some people fell strongly about supporting async operations (although 
I personally do not mind dropping this).

D.P.