From: Boris (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-22 05:26:13
Caleb Epstein wrote:
> concise, which is a tribute to the your implementation. At the same
> time, it is missing asynchronous and/or non-blocking operations and
> any means for doing single-threaded I/O multiplexing (e.g.
But these don't belong to a streams library anway - at least I wouldn't know
how to support these I/O models without changing the stream interface.
> If non-blocking I/O were a possibility, I don't think throwing
> exceptions on EWOUDBLOCK would be performant.
It should be possible to use socket streams with and without exceptions -
then we come close to std::iostreams (and I think this is the goal of a
socket streams library). As there is no flag in std::iostreams to indicate
EWOULDBLOCK you use an existing one like failbit or introduce a new one eg.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk