7 Jun
2010
7 Jun
'10
10:30 a.m.
Sorry to answer myself,
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Felipe Magno de Almeida
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 7:17 AM, Igor R
wrote: You would destroy the socket. Delete'ing it,
So it would be always necessary to store a ptr to a socket? Then delete the socket, which was passed by reference to async_read()? Doesn't sound good, does it?
I see. You would call cancel first. Unfortunately cancelling is not very reliable. But cancelling is what is conceptually right here IMHO.
Also, the destructor guarantees to cancel any pending asynchronous operation AFAIK. So it isn't a problem AFAIU. Unless you have multithreading issues, which would be a problem with close as well. [snip] -- Felipe Magno de Almeida