20 Dec
2005
20 Dec
'05
5:39 a.m.
"Peter Petrov" <ppetrov@ppetrov.com> wrote in message news:do81b5$4ir$1@sea.gmane.org...
Arkadiy Vertleyb wrote:
That should not be difficult to achieve with derivation or some sort of policy. Looks like async_socket might be derived from sync_socket (or contain it).
This was also my thought - public derivation. I.e., the current socket class is refactored into two classes - base (sync_socket) and and derived (async_socket). The sync_socket class won't know anyhing about demuxers (it doesn't need to).
Except that demuxer is currently also a service repository. And wouldn't the service repository if decoupled from a demuxer be a legitimate candidate for a singleton?