"Arkadiy Vertleyb" <vertleyb@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:dnq894$11t$1@sea.gmane.org...
So, when I am evaluating a "Networking Library", and see that it clearly consideres one approach to networking inferior to the other one, and I think they both are equaly important, that means that I am in fundamental disagreement with the library author on the subject, and makes me wonder whether this is the networking library I would like to see in Boost.
"Inferiority" is not the point here. The reason asynchronous interface is given more attention is that it is
"Eugene Alterman" <eugalt@verizon.net> wrote the
one that is non-trivial. The real value of this library is the asynchronous part.
OK
There is nothing special about synchronous operations, and they have been implemented in similar ways in dozens of networking libraries.
See, I don't care much about other libraries -- I am not going to use them. But if this one becomes part of Boost, I may start using it, and so I would like it to have what I need, with a clean interface, and implemented in a clean way. Regards, Arkadiy