Subject: Re: [boost] [Interprocess] Named pipe interface proposal
From: Geoff Shannon (geoffpshannon_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-08-12 01:21:35
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 10:09 PM, yuri kilochek <yuri.kilochek_at_[hidden]>wrote:
> Why not derive from std::streambuf overriding appropriate functions? Isn't
> it the standard way to deal with custom data streams?
It doesn't seem like it's quite what I'm looking for. For instance this SO
streambuf seems to indicate that it's something of an implementation
detail, and thus not appropriate for a high-level interface. I think the
Boost.Asio buffer class is much more appropriate.
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