Hi Felipe, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Felipe Magno de Almeida" <felipe.m.almeida@gmail.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org>
In your opinion, my use of spirit grammars isnt the best way to implement a text-based protocol?
No; it's great use of language technology.
Or was only a problem with the different meanings of grammars that we were using?
Exactly. If you really think
it isnt the right way, I would like to hear from you why and what would be better in this case. I'm only using it, because it felt right to do it, and it really helped me writing RFC-compliant code.
From the number of follow-up posts relating to the intergration of parsing (Xpressive) and I/O (asio) issues, I'm reassured that
I'm sure your approach will have improved robustness and ease of maintenance. there is something worth picking away at. The application of language technology to network messaging (e.g. the TCP application suite) is lovely but to actually bring it all together takes quite a bit of glue. I'm hoping that we can eventually all be using the same glue and that that glue will be better than my glue :-) Cheers.