Boost logo

Boost :

From: Michel André (michel.andre_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-04-24 13:14:07

Boris wrote:
> Giovanni P. Deretta wrote:
>>[...] I've have seen that the current consens is to encode the the stream
>> type in the address, so to allow a dynamic behaviour: the actual
>>transport is selected only at runtime, based on the address string. I
> Michel Andre asked a similar question about template based or
> inheritance/interface based approach (see
> and scroll down)
> and got only one answer (that was mine). I don't see much of a consensus but
> lots of ideas. There is no general consensus so far about the package
> structure of the whole network library. So there can't be any consensus
> about how different packages look inside. So let us do this step first
> before we do the second please.

Even if we go for a interface/inheritance based approach is would like
to expose tcp_stream/tcp_connector/tcp_acceptor/udp_stream et al and the
like so the user could instantiate a concrete implementation and not
going through the address, dynamic factory thingy. There might be
specifics in these classes that you care for if you only support tcp eg.


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