Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-22 11:08:44

Jeff Garland <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:

> All -
> I'm pleased to announce that asio has been accepted into Boost.

Thanks for completing what must've been a difficult review judgement,

> As usual with a Boost review, the asio review generated plenty of
> discussion, issues, and controversy. Comments ranged from high
> praise, including success stories of projects in production, to
> serious design concerns and issues. On balance, in my judgment,
> asio provides a generally solid library that is ready for inclusion
> into the Boost library -- providing key functionality in an area
> that developers have a strong need.
> Of course, like anything else, asio is not perfect -- a number of key
> issues were uncovered during the review. In terms of required changes
> I'm only going to cite a few:
> - Fixes to dynamic memory allocation issues
> - Interface changes to support ipv4 and ipv6 seamlessly at runtime
> - Improvements to support strongly typed socket interfaces

If you're only citing a few of the required changes, where is the
complete list? Keeping it out of public view doesn't make any sense
to me.

> Chris has communicated a couple possible solutions to the memory
> allocation issue and I'll ask that the interface and other changes for
> this issue continue to be discussed on the Boost list so consensus can
> be achieved on the best resolution.
> Other key improvements that should be explored as future enhancements
> include:
> - Possible removal of some of the c-style interfaces
> - Exploration of higher level iostream integrations
> - Performance improvements
> - Improved documentation (wouldn't be Boost w/o this one)
> Chris has a much longer list of changes garnered from the review and is
> well on his way to addressing many of them.
> Note that there were several threads and discussions about performance,
> which is particularly critical for the domain covered by asio. One of
> the performance issues is the dynamic memory allocation issue cited
> above. In general, the reviewers have extremely high expectations here.
> However, after reviewing the discussion and library it's my belief that
> many developers will find asio performance sufficient to build
> significant projects with only the memory allocation changes. I expect
> Chris will be able to address some of the other performance issues cited
> by reviewers in asio over time.

Are these issues addressable as an implementation detail, or will it
cause an interface change?

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

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