Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] [gsoc] Boost.Process done
From: Ilya Sokolov (ilyasokol_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-09-02 16:58:27

On 03.09.2010 0:27, Boris Schaeling wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Sep 2010 00:36:33 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>
> wrote:
>> On 02.09.2010 2:09, Boris Schaeling wrote:
>>> On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 23:51:07 +0200, Ilya Sokolov <ilyasokol_at_[hidden]>
>>> wrote:
>>>>> I quote then the paragraph starting with "The benefits of using
>>>>> components from other libraries...". ;)
>>>>> Anyway, while it all sounds good in theory how many developers are out
>>>>> there trying to use single Boost libraries without installing the
>>>>> others?
>>>> Actually, I wasn't thinking about such developers, but about
>>>> compilation
>>>> time (lexical cast and algo.str), portability and stability
>>>> (filesystem).
>>>>> It sounds like a bit too much effort reinventing what has been
>>>>> implemented in other Boost libraries for what I expect is a relatively
>>>>> small group of developers?
>>>> The dependencies I object to are easy to avoid.
>>> Regarding boost::lexical_cast: There is to_string() in Boost.Uuid in
>>> 1.44 but not in 1.43. Or what were you thinking of?
>> I was thinking about sprintf or ostringstream. If you add async_pipe,
>> there will be no need for Boost.Uuid
> I don't want to give up named_pipe entirely as we don't know if someone
> has a need for it.

Sorry for my obscure explanations, I meant that we could have the
following kinds of pipe:

- pipe (i.e. anonymous pipe)
- named_pipe (requires a name as an argument, no need to generate it)
- async_pipe
     - POSIX: typedef'ed to pipe
     - Windows: derived from named_pipe, uses UuidCreateSequential()
       for the random name


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