Subject: Re: [boost] [Interprocess] Named pipe interface proposal
From: Geoff Shannon (geoffpshannon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-10 18:41:16
On Saturday, August 10, 2013, niXman wrote:
> named_pipe_object named_pipe_server::accept();
> There is synchronous accept, but there is no asynchronous accept. Why?
Mainly for simplicity of the first implementation and because that seems to
start overlapping a lot with Boost.Asio territory.
Once the initial implementation is working that would be high on the list
of new features ;)
My intention for implementation targets are linux and windows since I have
some experience with those platforms. Under Windows I intend to use the
Named Pipe feature so your input would be invaluable Edward.
For the unix side I've determined that the most compatible (feature and
semantics-wise) mechanism would be Unix domain sockets so it should be
fairly trivial to port to OS X and other *nix like platforms (if anything
is needed to port it at all). I'll be able to test it personally under
Linux, Windows 7 and Mac OS X 10.7
The code (such as it is) is hosted at
Nothing is ever easy.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk