Re: [Boost-users] Networking TS + Beast, NEW Tutorials, Read this to learn std::net !!!

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Networking TS + Beast, NEW Tutorials, Read this to learn std::net !!!
From: Robert Ramey (ramey_at_[hidden])
Date: 2019-03-16 23:21:07

On 3/16/19 3:37 PM, Emil Dotchevski via Boost-users wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 3:05 PM Niall Douglas via Boost-users 
> <boost-users_at_[hidden] <mailto:boost-users_at_[hidden]>> wrote:
>  >
>  > >> Networking ought to be some stupid-simple coroutinised Ranges i/o API
>  > > on the top. […]
>  > >
>  > > This.
>  >
>  > We *may* get this, if everything works out.
>  >
>  > Eric Niebler has a fairly complete concept of what a high level Ranges
>  > i/o ought to look like.
>  >
>  > Dalton Woodard is working on a generic mechanism for Ranges i/o to
>  > discover any low level scatter-gather i/o implementation, such that
>  > Ranges can "just work" with whatever you feed it.
>  >
>  > Elias Kosunen is working on an iostreams << replacement matching the >>
>  > replacement which is fmt, just standardised into C++ 20.
>  >
>  > Zach Laine and others are working on Unicode string support.
>  >
>  > I'm working on a generic low level i/o library API, and have just
>  > internally distributed the first draft of an enhanced C++ memory and
>  > object model which has first class support for exchanging
>  > representations of objects between multiple C++ programs. I'll be
>  > releasing draft 2 to SG12 next week, I'll be speaking on the topic at
>  > ACCU in April followed by attending WG14 in May, all building towards
>  > generating a head of steam for progress within WG21 over
>  > Cologne-Belfast-Prague-Bulgaria.
> 
> I don't see how it is a good thing for things that haven't been adopted 
> to make it straight into the standard. What's wrong with publishing 
> libraries, then standardizing the ones that are already de-facto 
> standard? Github makes things super easy, publish stuff, and in a few 
> years we know what's what and then standardization is a simple nod from 
> the committee, reflecting the reality of what's already used in practice.

+1

Lot's people are saying this.  But no one is listening.

Robert Ramey