From: Boris (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-05-05 17:11:24
Caleb Epstein wrote:
> On 5/5/05, Nathan Myers <ncm_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> (I don't know what of the above has already been discussed, I just
>> rejoined after a long hiatus.)
> Oh there has been a LOT of discussion in the past month or so.
And we are relaxing right now a bit from these discussions. ;-)
> I'm not sure there is 100% consensus on this, but my understanding is
> that a Boost.Sockets implementation would provide interfaces at
> several different layers, and iostreams would be at one of the higher
I agree that this seems to be the only concensus we have so far - please see
the package diagram at http://www.highscore.de/boost/net/packages.png which
should help to understand the status quo. It is quite minimalistic but
anything else is still under heavy discussion.
One of the next steps is to make sure that each package follows clear goals.
This should help to understand what kind of functionality should be provided
by each package.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk