From: Chris Cleeland (cleeland_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-01-11 17:59:18
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006, Hickman, Greg wrote:
> If possible, I'd lean toward the ability to both take advantage of the
> platform where it makes sense and rely on portable abstractions everywhere
I don't think we're disagreeing.
> What if I need to demultiplex file I/O events as well as socket events in a
> TCP-based echo client? Without the socket handle, I don't know how to use
> asio sockets for that.
That would certainly be the way that I would do it, i.e., allow access to the
socket handle. However, there might be a "better" or more boost-like way to
do something like this, so I didn't want to try to drive an implementation
from a perspective that might be narrower than those who've been around
longer than I.
What's important is not trapping future users of the abstraction by not
offering ways around or through the abstraction to do platform-specific
things. Since sockets are standardized and the posix standards can be
wishy-washy in places asio layers atop stuff that's only semi-portable.
-- Chris Cleeland, cleeland_c @ ociweb.com, http://www.milodesigns.com/~chris Principal Software Engineer, Object Computing, Inc., +1 314 579 0066 Support Me Supporting Cancer Survivors in Ride for the Roses 2005 >>>>>>>>> Donate at http://www.milodesigns.com/donate <<<<<<<<<
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk