Hu Xinwei wrote:
> And what is more. I think I/O multiplex(reactor) or Async I/O(proactor) are
> heavily used on server-side, but only will be used on client-side accidently.
> So, all these classes should be invisiable to client, we should provide server
> models directly.
There are plenty of cl
hi boosters:
>http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?BoostSocket/SocketSetConcept
>Can we use std::set like method names...
>remove -> erase
>add -> insert
>is_set -> count (I'm not fussed about this one)
Wrap fd_set is interesting, but I don't think it is necessary.
> I think ACE is an almost perfect model for what we want. The main
I agree there are many good things about ACE.
> things I would like to see done differently in boost are
>
> 1) Use namespaces.
> 2) Support exception handling.
> 3) Use std containers.
> 3) Use other boost libraries.
Yes and:
On Sun, 2002-11-24 at 21:22, Hugo Duncan wrote:
> > is_set -> count (I'm not fussed about this one)
> Not sure about "count", how about something like "active"
Yes, or "contains"?
> > Also for library implementors I think we need
> > update_width()
> > To be called after the OS has updated the f
Hamish,
On 24 Nov 2002 19:01:01 +, Hamish Mackenzie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/cgi-bin/boost_wiki/wiki.pl?BoostSocket/SocketSetConcept
> Can we use std::set like method names...
>
> remove -> erase
> add -> insert
Sure.
> is_set -> count (I'm not fuss
