Re: [boost] libzeep

Subject: Re: [boost] libzeep
From: Juraj Ivančić (juraj.ivancic_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-13 18:21:31

On 13.4.2010 14:04, Maarten L. Hekkelman wrote:
> Now suppose people here are interested in this library, I'm willing to
> spend some time to upgrade the code to boost quality standards and write
> more documentation. And if the boost community prefers another approach
> I'm willing to provide help based on my recent experience.

I think this library is an excellent idea and was looking for something 
similar for quite a while. So +1 for people interested in this library.

> I'm looking forward to your feedback.

I wanted to give it a try but unfortunately it does not compile on 
windows. A little peeking around the code showed that there was some 
fork() calls as well as some unix specific IPC (socketpair). Also, ASIOs 
native_socket_type is used in some places. Is there any special reason 
for this? You are already using asio and great deal of boost, why not go 
all the way and be portable? I'd be glad to help here if I can.

Just out of curiosity - why does HTTP server spawn a worker process? Is 
it merely 'the unix way of doing things' or does it improve performance 
compared to keeping everything intraprocess?

As an interesting side note - while attempting to compile libzeep I 
found that VS 9.0 compiler does not recognize spelled logical operators 
('or', 'not' and 'and') as C++ keywords. Furthermore, passing macros 
like or=|| on the VS command line causes internal compiler error. 
Putting them inside code as #defines is OK for VS, but gcc (correctly) 
refuses to preprocess this.