Re: [boost] surveying async network io libraries

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-11 15:54:38

"Jose" <jmalv04_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:2084b47d05081100274a4988b3_at_mail.gmail.com...
> On 8/11/05, Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> On 8/10/05, Jose <jmalv04_at_[hidden]> wrote:

>> ACE is indeed overkill for *just* networking, but it is battle-tested,
>> feature-rich, fast, and *very* portable.  Like it or not, many of the
>> patterns implemented in ACE are must-haves once you have a nice
>> networking library and want to start writing more complex applications
>> (logging, threads, synchronization primitives, message queues, active
>> objects, etc.).  Boost provides a number of these, but the sheer
>> breadth, depth, and maturity of ACE makes for a very compelling
>> library.
>
> Yes, but I think many boost users are looking for something simpler
> (based on the many networking threads written) that leverages other
> boost libraries as well.

Also, Boost users are looking for something that plays well with the C++ 
Standard Library and TR1. ACE goes its own way. For example, ACE directory 
iterators aren't anything like STL iterators. That makes ACE less attractive 
to some users.

--Beman