Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done
From: Boris Schaeling (boris_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-01 15:20:41

On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 17:27:11 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>  
wrote:

> On 01.09.2010 18:55, Ilya Sokolov wrote:
>> class stream // I don't like this name
>> {
>> public:
>> virtual ~stream() {};
>> // create_child() calls this method
>> virtual void create_parent_and_child_end(handle&, handle&);
>> };
>
> Another try:
>
> class stream
> {
> public:
>    virtual ~stream() {};
>    virtual void set_fileno(int);
>    virtual std::pair<handle, handle> create_parent_and_child_end();
> };
>
> class inherit : public stream
> {
> public:
>    void set_fileno(int);
>    void create_parent_and_child_end(handle& pe, handle& ce)
>    {
>      handle pe;
>      handle ce(GetStdHandle(DWORD(fileno_ - 10)));
>      return std::make_pair(pe, ce);
>    };
>
> private:
>    int fileno_;
> };
>
> class context
> {
> public:
>    context& stdin(stream s)
>    {
>      s.set_fileno(0);
>      stdin_ = s;
>      return *this;
>    }
>    ...
> };

Looking at your proposed stream class I'd call it now a factory class.  
This makes sense to me and is even easier to explain (as many developers  
should be familiar with that pattern). The factory method could be called  
in create_child() making it possible to reuse contexts.

But why did you add set_fileno()? Do we need this method if we have  
create_parent_and_child_end() already? The example looks like as if it's  
only required by inherit and thus shouldn't be added to stream really?

Boris