Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread Adrian Chadd
On Thu, Feb 19, 2009, Nick Mathewson wrote: > If I understand correctly, Adrian, you also think that bufferevent-ish > stuff should have API-separation from the event-ish stuff (which I > believe in) and that it should go into a separate library from > libevent_core (which I don't agree with, but

Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread James Mansion
Adrian Chadd wrote: 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 That would be splendid. The only API I've found that is at what I'd consider 'the

Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread Martin Scholl
Hello all, if with "async io" is meant "doing native async disc / file io", then there already is code that integrates with libevent-2.0. Recently, Valery Kholodkov and myself did some work in this direction. The latest version you can find in Valery's git tree right here: http://github.

Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread Nick Mathewson
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 01:35:07AM +0900, Adrian Chadd wrote: [...] > 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 wil

Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread Matthew Weigel
jamal wrote: 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? The DNS and HTTP stuff is there so people don't have to constantly re-invent those tasks themselves. How

Re: [Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread Adrian Chadd
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 H

[Libevent-users] dumb question

2009-02-19 Thread jamal
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