> On Sun, 2002-11-24 at 21:23, Jeff Garland wrote: > > Is there a reason why we can't define a simple socket library first > > as a lower layer without the complications of multiplexing and > > threading and then add those on top?
Jeremy Maitin-Shepard wrote: > That seems reasonable, since due to the great differences between the > blocking and multiplexing models, the interface would be very > different. For example, a streambuf interface would not be very usuable > in a non-blocking multiplexing model, and furthermore using C++ I don't agree that streams and streambufs are not useable with non-blocking I/O. ACE provides stream classes that can do can be used with a blocking or non-blocking model. Also see prior discussion on this list from March 2001... It starts here, http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/1146641 But really starts getting into this here: http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Mail/Message/1146745 Jeff _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
