From: Pedro LamarÃ£o (pedro.lamarao_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-02 09:19:13
Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
> Asynchronous socket support: Finding a way to represent asynchronosity,
> that works with diverse coding styles, meshes with existing interfaces,
> and doesn't monopolize control flow away from foreign components, is the
> most important feature needed for a standards-track sockets proposal.
> Please do not consider submitting this library for review without this.
> I expect that the work of creating this interface, in a form that
> addresses everyone's diverse needs, will dwarf the amount of effort
> required to create a synchronous socket streambuf. This is not a
> feature that can be tacked on later: it is essential to the design.
There are many networking applications where synchronous operation is
quite suficient. Most of these can use threading to deal with concurrent
I don't think it's particularly useful to hold a library that fulfills
these needs in order to achieve the holy grail of C++ IO. One thing at a
As discussed before, if it makes everyone more comfortable, the name
"Boost.Network" can be saved for a more powerful yet-to-come library.
-- Pedro LamarÃ£o
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk