Boost logo

Boost :

From: Eugene Alterman (eugalt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-14 18:04:25

"Arkadiy Vertleyb" <vertleyb_at_[hidden]> wrote in message

> Let me disagree with this. There are cases when having multiple threads,
> each working in a synchronous way, is a better approach. First, it's much
> more intuitive, and easier to debug. Second, sometimes it's the only way
> to
> achieve you goal, such as whan you can't (or don't want to) rewrite your
> processing algorithm in asynchronous way.
> And when such a case arrives, it would be nice to have a clean socket
> class,
> without build-in asynchronisity.

Hold on a second...

Where has this perception that asio implements synchronous operations on top
of asynchronous come from?
>From what I can see in docs and sources this does not seem to be the case.
Notice that demuxer::run() is not called in the tutorial synchronous

Synchronous operations are simply implemented as regular blocking socket

I think Chris was misinterpreted when he tried to justify constructing a
socket with demuxer even if it is only used synchronously.

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at