Re: [boost] Re: sockets Interface for address class

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-03-01 16:45:54

At 12:42 PM 3/1/2002, Iain.Hanson_at_[hidden] wrote:
 >
 >Ahhh. Now I think I understand where the confusion is comming from. The
 >requirements state that we need to restrict ourselves to the network and
 >transport layers and not go off into http and ftp.
 >
 >I have no desire to go against this requirements but IP is not the only
 >network layer protocol that is supported by the C sockets API.
 >
 >I would like to reproduce, as much as possible, of the genericity of the 
C
 >sockets API with type saftey and without some of the redunancy.

The requirements weren't meant to be a straight-jacket.

The point was to avoid everything-but-the-kitchen-sink designs.  Usually 
this is avoided layering higher level concepts on top of lower level 
concepts.  To my very limited knowledge of the domain, http and ftp seemed 
like higher level concepts to be layered on top of the foundation stuff.

--Beman