From: Peter Petrov (ppetrov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-20 06:29:14
Eugene Alterman wrote:
> "Peter Petrov" <ppetrov_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> This was also my thought - public derivation. I.e., the current socket
>> class is refactored into two classes - base (sync_socket) and and
>> derived (async_socket). The sync_socket class won't know anyhing about
>> demuxers (it doesn't need to).
> Except that demuxer is currently also a service repository.
> And wouldn't the service repository if decoupled from a demuxer be a
> legitimate candidate for a singleton?
My understanding is that the "service repository" is actually only
needed for the asynchronous operations.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk