Re: [boost] singleton asio::demuxer as default? (was: asioformalreview begins)

From: Matt Vogt (mattvogt_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-21 23:08:48

Christopher Kohlhoff <chris <at> kohlhoff.com> writes:

> I propose that it could be called something like "io_system".
> (Other naming suggestions will be appreciated.) 

Based on the statements below, I think io_engine might be appropriate.

> Consider the following statements:
> 
> - An io_system object must be initialised before sockets (or
>   other I/O objects) can be used. See the portability
>   requirement above.
> 
> - An io_system object is an extensible collection of I/O
>   services (drivers?).
> 
> - Synchronous operations implicitly run the io_system object for
>   an individual operation.
> 
> - You must run() the io_system object for it to perform
>   asynchronous operations on your behalf.
> 
> - You can partition your program by using multiple io_system
>   objects.

I wonder if 'service' is the best name for the set of I/O objects encapsulated
by the library, but I can't offer any alternatives...

Matt