Hi Felipe, --- Felipe Magno de Almeida <felipe.m.almeida@gmail.com> wrote:
Yes, I tried this. IMO it *almost* works ok. Because it obligates me to have a class that lives throughout all the connection, what I would like to have is lots of handlers, one after the other, and each one take care of the connection and connections resources lifetimes. Although, thinking a little bit now, probably having one class that lives throughout all the connection would improve performance if it would be possible to have flexibility modifying the handler's order. How do you take care about this flexibility?
I'm not quite sure what you mean by handler order here. Can you give an example?
I think it would be the better way... sockets having auto_ptr semantics, but without the dynamic allocation.
Yep, although I think moving (i.e. creation of a temporary equivalent to auto_ptr_ref) should be explicit, rather than implicit like auto_ptr. Cheers, Chris