Re: [boost] Re: behond IOStreams

From: Carlo Wood (carlo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-12 17:13:44

On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 02:31:17PM -0700, Jeff Garland wrote:
> would encourage you to help on boost.socket et. al.

Are you the author of boost.socket?  I mailed to the email
address given on sourceforge (the giallo project) but got
no response.  I assumed the project was dead.

> Honestly, I think there
> isn't much overlap between boost.socket and IOStreams.  In previous
> discussion,  we hashed around the idea of having a streambuf and stream to use
> with sockets -- it's been so long since I looked at it I'm not sure what if
> anything got implemented.

I am interested in designing a standalone multiplexor library.
It should merely *support* IOStream - it should be possible to
use the two together in a seemless way.  The multiplexor library
itself however is not really related to streambufs imho.

> Also, if it's just multiplexing then there were a few ideas we discussed --
> again I don't think there's implementation of all these things yet.
> 
> http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?BoostSocket/Multiplexing

Yes I already read that.

> If you can't wait or depend on pre-beta software then really you should
> consider using ACE.  There's lots of things about ACE that are ugly, but there
> are plenty of things to like.  It's robust, cross-platform, and used on real
> projects everywhere -- you can count on it actually working.  

Did you read my previous posts?  Please do so.  Have a look at point 5.
Please reply to point 1 through 6 in that order (and only post in a
next thread when you basically agree with the previous thread).

> I still want to see a modern replacement adopted into boost, but you have
> figure it would be at least a year out -- assuming someone was really working
> on it :-(

I am about 20 times faster than most people (according to my boss) :)
On the other hand - I think I'll need 2 months for the code - and another
1 or 2 months for documentation and examples, because I am not familiar
with windows (yet) (if it were only unix then 365/20 = 18 days would indeed
be more than enough).

However - lots and lots and lots of time will be spend on waiting for
people to reply to posts - and RE-post the same things over and over
because they don't read things very well :p.  I am not sure yet if I will
have the patience for that :/ - we'll see how that goes.  I had the plan
to wait with further development till several people had replied the 6
threads that I started - but after 24 hours still no real reply has
been posted, and not doing anything for more than a day is not acceptable.
I guess I will have to continue without feedback then :(.

Unfortunately - additional posts (like a point 7, 8 etc. do make sense
without feedback - because they would be 'fuzzy' brainstorm things,
lots of feedback back and forward with a very small delay will be
necessary to make any progress imho.  Perhaps, if you are the author
of boost.socket, we should do this in a private mail exchange?

-- 
Carlo Wood <carlo_at_[hidden]>