On Thu, Feb 19, 2009, jamal wrote: > > I hope i come out sound patronizing or putting down the good > work done in libevent. > > Is libevent trying to be too many things? I love the > all-things-IO libevent provides; i guess buffer events are a natural > evolution path - but why all the DNS or HTTP stuff? whats next? > Is the end goal to become the one stop shop for all protocols > (like python twisted)?
> I know i dont have to use or compile all the goodies, but > would it not make more sense to keep the protocol processing > engines as a separate library that uses libevent (or for > that matter whatever the competition is)? I brought this up with Nick a couple weeks ago when we bumped into each other. I raised the possibility of breaking out the non-"event" code into separate libraries with enforced API boundaries. We were talking about various directions 2.0 can go in (in the context of doing sensible async IO that will scale under both windows and unix, given their differences of opinion in APIs :) but Nick's design goals differ slightly from my ideals. Adrian _______________________________________________ Libevent-users mailing list Libevent-users@monkey.org http://monkeymail.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
