Aaron W. LaFramboise wrote:
[...] -I don't like the obscurity/anonymity of the Wiki. Who precisely wrote those socket requirements, and what sort of concensus was there on them? Without going into specific detail beyond my initial response, I don't think that I would give a favorable review to a socket library based on those requirements.
I don't know who wrote the socket requirements. I just felt that I shouldn't ignore them. If there are any other requirements I would be happy to hear them. Eg. it seems like we found a new requirement these days as several people dislike the idea of a I/O streams based network library. I/O streams support seems to be desired only on a higher level?
[...] Perhaps a reason that noone has designed a really great sockets library yet is that there is little practical reason to, as BSD sockets is probably more portable (from a practical standpoint) than a Boost library will ever be, and libraries try to that "abstract" it have done nothing but get in the way.
Most developers probably make a decision which I/O model they want to support and forget about the rest. As there are four I/O models it doesn't make much sense if they are implemented by different developers again and again. This should be a very good reason to create a C++ network library. Boris