Re: [boost] surveying async network io libraries

From: Felipe Magno de Almeida (felipe.m.almeida_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-11 09:54:52

On 8/11/05, Jose <jmalv04_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On 11 Aug 2005 10:38:00 +0200, Peter Simons <simons_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > Jose writes:
> 
> I think there are three levels of demand for a boost networking library
> 
> 1) reactor --> for users wanting to develop network apps

I would add proactor in this level also.

> 2) fastcgi --> for users wanting to develop web apps interfacing with
> existing web servers

Is this possible into boost? cgis arent too much tied to the web
server? This would lead to too much maintenance overhead to keep it
working with the most of them.

> 3) other --> for users wanting to develop very complex network apps
> where more abstractions are needed (combining reactor, threads, ...)

Or the proactor could go in here.

> 
> Your library would fit levels 1 and 2 and the other libraries might be
> more appropiate for 3

I think the levels should accompany from lower to higher abstractions
inside the library. Like: sockets -> demultiplex -> reactor/proactor,
or something like this.

And as for fastcgi it could be an "another library" that uses one of
the levels of the networking library.

-- 
   Felipe Magno de Almeida
Developer from synergy and Computer Science student from State
University of Campinas(UNICAMP).
Unicamp: http://www.ic.unicamp.br
Synergy: http://www.synergy.com.br
"There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."