Sorry that I'm late. I was still taking care of my to-dos. :)
On 4/28/06, peter royal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Apr 22, 2006, at 10:14 AM, peter royal wrote: > What's the intent of the DelegatedIoAcceptor? It seems like an > extra step to have a SocketAcceptor extend DelegatedIoAcceptor, and > then pass in a SocketAcceptorDelegate.. Why not just promote > SocketAcceptorDelegate to being the SocketAcceptor?
You're right. Socket I/O service implementations doesn't need delegation at all. I did this for Dataqgram I/O service implementations. I shouldn't have done this for socket part. Thanks for pointing this out! Plus.. we could also get rid of delegates also for datagram implementations somehow. Trustin -- what we call human nature is actually human habit -- http://gleamynode.net/ -- PGP key fingerprints: * E167 E6AF E73A CBCE EE41 4A29 544D DE48 FE95 4E7E * B693 628E 6047 4F8F CFA4 455E 1C62 A7DC 0255 ECA6
