Daniel Larimer wrote:
An update on where I am. I have successfully added support for overloaded member functions and re-factored the code based upon some feedback given here and in the process have adopted the boost/stl naming conventions.
I have been thinking about the nature of the library and what I would call it and have concluded the following.
1) The "core library" should be free of any network code or dependency on boost::asio because networking is only one way to "invoke a method" on an object outside of your memory space (or even inside your memory space).
I agree, although there are quite a few Boost Libraries that could potentially be used for transport purposes, * Boost.Asio (event loop, TCP/IP, unix domain sockets) * Boost.Interprocess (shared memory stuff) * Boost.Function / Boost.Thread (local stuff) * Boost.MPI (all of the above :-)) Cheers, Rutger