[boost] Re: Re: Network library: What we have until now

From: Maxim Yegorushkin (e-maxim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-14 07:46:21

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:07:42 +0100, Iain Hanson  
<Iain.Hanson_at_[hidden]> wrote:

[]

>> You propose another set of concepts over socket concepts just to
>> send/receive a bunch of mere bytes. Geez, another glue layer over  
>> sockets
>> that adds nothing but syntax sugar. Aren't we already tired of software
>> bloated from glue layers over glue layers over...? You don't just send
>> bytes, rather you execute protocols. Sockets have the right  
>> implementation
>> level and complexity to build *efficient* protocols upon.

> I agree with you. I think the well defined concepts developed from BSD
> sockets and well known by many programmers is what we need for a layer 1
> sockets lib.

Yes, we already have the concepts, enough please.

> And I've always liked the idea of being able to specify
> protocols as a Spirit grammar.

Probably you mean Protocol Data Units (PDU) - the messages a protocol  
communicates with? It would be unwieldy to you specify and execute timouts  
using spirit grammar, I guess :)

>> Protocol is the
>> only glue layer you really always need, the layer that binds your
>> application logic with network transport layer (sockets) providing the
> [snip]                           ^^^^^^^^
>
> and Network and Data Link Layers.

May be. Most of my needs don't go deeper TCP / UDP / Unix local sockets.

-- 
Maxim Yegorushkin