Hi There!
Completely agree with you, William.
If you need a feature, spend time to add it.
cheers
Younès
William Ahern a écrit :
On Wed, Oct 18, 2006 at 12:04:11AM -0600, Jason Ish wrote:
I ran across at least one criticism of libevent gaining too much other
than pure event library:
http://varnish.projects.linpro.no/wiki/EventLibrary
All of these criticisms are partially or wholly invalid.
The DNS and HTTP code is effectively only distributed in the tarball; it's
not part of the library itself.
I don't understand the issue with struct event_base. Obviously it evolved,
but I don't understand how the current API is any less useful to a threaded
application.
The timestamp issue sounds like, "it doesn't have my particular pet feature,
so the library is misdesigned". First of all, why is anybody depending on
timestamps in such a pervasive manner as to want it built into the libevent
API, knowing or not knowing that the timestamp may or may not be the
particular timestamp the application desires (timestamp on a signal
delivered through a pipe flushed at the end of a loop... how is that
remotely useful for something seriously depending on a timestamp?). I *have*
written code to give back a fixed timestamp per loop, and maybe it would be
convenient if I could access libevent's copy, but I wouldn't criticize
libevent for that.
And where are these bugs and misfeatures in libevent? Personally I don't
like the model used for the evbuffer framework, but I wouldn't call it a bug
or misfeature.
_______________________________________________
Libevent-users mailing list
Libevent-users@monkey.org
http://monkey.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
|
_______________________________________________
Libevent-users mailing list
Libevent-users@monkey.org
http://monkey.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
