On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 12:19 PM Niall Douglas via Boost-users
That's not how I read the OP's point. He seemed to me to be pointing out that .NET APIs provide a stupid-simple API on top of lots of complexity which itself sits on top of the Win32 winsock API.
Well, I think you read it incorrectly.
And that I find a very fair criticism of the Networking TS
You're doing the same thing that the OP did, which is blaming Networking TS for not doing enough. Let me see if I can explain it "stupid-simple" for you: We have this lower layer N (which is Networking TS) but users want SS (stupid-simple high level interface). SS can be implemented in terms of N, and you criticize Networking TS because it is N and not SS. It sounds like I have perfectly characterized the point of both the OP and yourself. I agree that we need SS but that doesn't mean we should not have N. Then there's B (for Beast) which uses N, and can be used to write SS but that's a whole different discussion :) Here's a diagram to make it easy: SS Stupid/Simple <--- You want this B Beast <--- We have this now N Networking TS <-- We've had this Please show me on the diagram why the availability of N and/or B are obstacles to implement SS? Thanks