Boost logo

Boost :

From: Caleb Epstein (caleb.epstein_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-14 08:28:20

On 4/13/05, Don G <dongryphon_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> --- Caleb Epstein wrote:
> > On 4/13/05, Don G <dongryphon_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> >> I also believe that non-blocking is an I/O only thing; it is not
> >> needed for connect or accept.
> >
> > Not sure about the need for a non-blocking accept, but a
> > non-blocking connect is a must-have.
> What do you mean by non-blocking exactly? Based on the proposal I
> posted, async connect seems about the same as non-blocking: call me
> when I can connect... oh, wait, I am connected :). Maybe I'm missing
> something in the definitions?

I mean that you initiate the connect (or accept), and it will either
succeed (or fail) immediately, or give you some indication that the
operation is still in progress. There will need to be some mechanism
for being notified later when the operation has completed.

I may be muddying the waters with imprecise words (async vs.
non-blocking) but I hope my intent is clear.

Caleb Epstein
caleb dot epstein at gmail dot com

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at