From: Sean Kelly (sean_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-30 12:41:22
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote:
> "Darryl Green" <Darryl.Green_at_[hidden]> writes:
>>I don't see why the library shouldn't be generic enough to allow a
>>unification on a platform that supports it.
> I suppose it is possible, but is there any platform other than Windows
> that supports it? Also, it seems that the interface to support waiting
> on a mutex would be too loo-level to then allow use of either
> asynchronous I/O or synchronous I/O, depending on the platform.
I'm currently leaning towards picking up work on the existing
Boost.Socket implementation and adding generic waits at a higher level
or perhaps in another package? There's no reason a condvar can't be
used for this type of thing. No need to rely on nonportable library calls.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk