From: Hugo Duncan (hugoduncan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-09-15 15:05:00
Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
> Hugo Duncan wrote:
>> i) Low level, platform header hiding, object based wrappers of
>> sockets, named pipes, select, and completion ports (and a POSIX aio
>> wrapper on linux that I have tried to get to work in many different
>> ways and failed so far).
> One concern I have is that this will not mesh well with other clients of
> demultiplexors, such as process management or GUIs (network libraries
> and gui libraries are both notorious for monopolizing control flow).
> These things apparently need to be run in a separate thread.
I am not sure how your comment arises from the part of my post that you
The proactor and reactor classes in giallo know nothing of sockets
etc, and they can run in whichever thread you want.
> My primarily interest in demultiplexors is that they should be universal
> and unintrusive. Its my feeling that once an elegant, universal, and
> free C++ demultiplexor exists, people will stop reimplementing it over
> and over, and spend more time writing their networking library or GUI.
Agreed! I am sure there are deficiencies in the giallo demultiplexors,
but the design aims are congruent with your interests.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk