Re: [boost] [async] messages threads and networks

Subject: Re: [boost] [async] messages threads and networks
From: vicente.botet (vicente.botet_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-04-25 06:02:12

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Woods" <scott_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: [boost] [async] messages threads and networks

> 
> 
>> > I am interested in a Boost review of this library but suspect it is
>> > too large. It also overlaps with several existing boost components.
>> > But good to get further opinions.
>>
>> I have read your last posts about your mega library. I'm interested on the 
>> kind of services the library could provide.
>>
> 
> Perhaps MegaMessaging.lib?
> 
>> I don't think people would spent time to inspect code without the Boost 
>> license that reinvent a lot of Boost libraries.
> 
> Sorry this is a little confusing. I can understand that Boosters will be 
> less inclined to review a library
> that replicates some existing Boost components. Even if there is 
> differentiation in the implementations
> I am resigned to the natural reluctance.
> 
> But it is the sum of the parts that I have hopes for. I am willing to 
> substitute reinventions with the
> appropriate Boost component as necessary.

Scott, using Boost to implement your own library will help to get more people interested in your library (at least for inclusion in Boost). This probes that you know which parts od Boost can be reused without reinventing the wheel, the suers needs to lears less things, as he possible already knows the reused parts.

> But you also mention the lack of a Boost license. Are you suggesting that 
> all code offered for
> review must first hand over all rights? With some effort I can see 
> justification for such a position
> but it leaves me (and others like me) with a difficult question.

No this is not absolutely necesary. Reviewing a lot of code that is not released with BSL could be a waste of time if at the end you decide to not propose your library to Boost. The fact you release it under BSL is already a good sign that you want to make it part od Boost.
 
>> Is there more documentation that the one contained on the link?
> 
> Yes but they are internal and extremely abstract. Peer reviews have 
> suggested that these docs are
> probably not useful to users of the library.

This question was related to the missing link "The Extended Journey" as the communication and networking part was in ;-)
Anyway, is there a Reference page of all the files classes functions ... available?

> This library is an internal development. It is/will be used for product 
> development. All the materials
> that you have seen were created at the expense of that development. And in 
> the full knowledge that
> organizations such as Boost are less than likely to accept/adopt/integrate.
> 
>> Could you show how the objects read the messages?
> 
> I'm not entirely sure what you are asking for. If I give a quick description 
> perhaps you can
> highlight the section of interest?

I see now how this works in the "The Extended Journey" link.
 
> Does this roadmap help to focus your question?
<snip>
Yes it helps.
 
>> A last point, to request interest on a library maybe the best could be to 
>> put "Request for interest" in the title, and show some motivating use 
>> cases.
> 
> Yes. Thanks for this. I will try out a few ideas while also considering your 
> other points. The level of
> interest so far is a concern. Not unexpected but silly to ignore.

It is up to you to make interest. This is part of the work to get a library on Boost. My experience is that this part is even harder than implementing your library, but the feedback will make your library much better.

Another thing that helps could be to been able to build and test your library with Boost.Build (bjam) so we can evaluate the portability of your library (If I have understood you have only tested using a windows platform with MSVC). Note that a library could start to be considered as portable when it is implemented on at least two platforms (Win|Linux) with two compilers (gcc|msvc). In addition there are some Boosters that have no access to MSVC, so this people will be unable to run the example programs.

Best,
_____________________
Vicente Juan Botet Escribá
http://viboes.blogspot.com/