From: Boris (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-22 08:21:04
Caleb Epstein wrote:
> On 4/22/05, Boris <boris_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> 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.
> No, not in a streams library, but they DO belong in a socket library.
> This implementation has both, but no non-blocking support that I can
> see at either level. The error code EWOULDBLOCK is handled (and
> causes an exception), but there seems to be no way to put a socket
> into non-blocking mode to cause it to be generated in the first place.
I agree with you, Caleb. Please have a look at the package structure where I
try to sort things out: http://www.highscore.de/boost/net/packages.png
Maybe the packages can be rearranged but they should give a complete picture
and include the requirements you were talking about.