"Jose" <jmalv04@gmail.com> wrote in message news:2084b47d05081100274a4988b3@mail.gmail.com...
On 8/11/05, Caleb Epstein <caleb.epstein@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/10/05, Jose <jmalv04@gmail.com> wrote:
ACE is indeed overkill for *just* networking, but it is battle-tested, feature-rich, fast, and *very* portable. Like it or not, many of the patterns implemented in ACE are must-haves once you have a nice networking library and want to start writing more complex applications (logging, threads, synchronization primitives, message queues, active objects, etc.). Boost provides a number of these, but the sheer breadth, depth, and maturity of ACE makes for a very compelling library.
Yes, but I think many boost users are looking for something simpler (based on the many networking threads written) that leverages other boost libraries as well.
Also, Boost users are looking for something that plays well with the C++ Standard Library and TR1. ACE goes its own way. For example, ACE directory iterators aren't anything like STL iterators. That makes ACE less attractive to some users. --Beman