From: Nathan Myers (ncm_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-05 12:42:08
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:42:33PM +0200, Peter Sommerlad wrote:
> I'd like to hear,
> a) if there is interest in iostream for sockets
> b) if there is already a solution pending for inclusion (to review it)
> c) if there are people working on it who I might join
Have you read the archives? (search on "socket") There's been a
lot of discussion, and I think some work done, but stalled.
On Unixy systems, of course, there's not much difference between
a socketbuf and a filebuf (presuming you can make one from a file
descriptor) or an aftermarket fdbuf or stdiobuf (if you can't).
On systems that don't have file descriptors, though, it is essential,
and as a Boost component it makes sense as a portability aid and a
convenience even for the Unixy folks.
Besides the regular streambuf operations, it would need ways to
open various sorts of connections, to set various modes and flags,
to discover more about why it returned EOF, and to support creative
buffering schemes (e.g. auto-grow, mmapped buffers for zero-copy
networking, seeking within still-buffered text and controlling
when to toss already-read text, and peeking at what's in the
buffer). Then there's non-blocking sockets...
(I don't know what of the above has already been discussed, I just
rejoined after a long hiatus.)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk