Re: [boost] singleton asio::demuxer as default?

From: Peter Dimov (pdimov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-12-24 08:12:42

Beman Dawes wrote:
> "Christopher Kohlhoff" <chris_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> news:20051221090730.33683.qmail_at_web32603.mail.mud.yahoo.com...

>> I propose that it could be called something like "io_system".
>> (Other naming suggestions will be appreciated.)
> 
> "io_system" seems a little broad. I think of an "io_system" as
> encompassing all I/O mechanisms an operating system supports. A web
> search turns up broad phrases like "The basic model of the UNIX I/O
> system is a sequence of bytes that can be accessed either randomly or
> sequentially." 
> 
> "io_engine" implies to me something at a very low level, like the set
> of device drivers.
> 
> How about "io_service"? That seems both narrowly focused and about
> the right level to me.

I think that a "driver" matches the description quite well:

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