Re: [boost] asio versus MSVC

From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-06-25 15:08:19

"Gennaro Prota" <gennaro_prota_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:3q2t92lvg668p42r9maq1a9unjpep8sgdq_at_4ax.com...
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 06:34:10 -0400, "Beman Dawes" <bdawes_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>
>>I'd really like to see asio progress to the point where Chris can write a
>>full proposal for TR2. That is a lot of work to do between now and the
>>October deadline.
>
> Hi Beman,
>
> I haven't had time to do a serious review of Asio yet, so this
> question may be totally dumb: will it be submitted *monolitically*? It
> seems to me there are some parts, such as the ipv4, ipv6 classes which
> could well live on their own and be used separately from the rest. I
> guess many of the thread related parts could be insulated as well,
> though again I haven't checked throughly.

You really need to address this question to Chris. It is up to him how he 
wants to structure his proposal to the committee.

But the usual practice is to put all interdependent components into the same 
proposal, even if the components are logically separated. Otherwise in a 
committee environment, you run the risk of the infrastructure items getting 
approved but the stuff actually useful to end-uses not getting approved, or 
visa versa.

That's why the filesystem proposal, for example, included some changes to 
the diagnostics clause.

--Beman