----Original Message---- From: Thorsten Ottosen [mailto:nesotto@cs.aau.dk] Sent: 19 August 2005 00:10 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] asio networking proposal

If the only performance sensible iterator types are T*, I would't mind simply

template< unsigned N > void receive( char (&)[N] );

template< unsigned N > void receive( char (&)[N], unsigned size );

void recieve( vector<char>& );

void recieve( vector<char>&, unsigned size );

or something.

I have a hard time imagining any overhead imposed by vector<char> compared to a heap-allocated char*.

I'm commenting from the sidelines here, and I'm in the camp that instinctively recoils from a (void*,size_t) interface. However, if we can persuade Christopher to add a slightly higher level interface, can I put in a plea for it to be in terms of "unsigned char", rather than plain char? I don't know about others, but I have a convention that "char" means "textual data", and "unsigned char" is reserved for "raw memory". (Unsigned char also makes it easier to grab bit-fields by shifting - the behaviour is more completely defined). Also:

void receive( char (&)[N], unsigned size ); void recieve( vector<char>& ); ^^ I was going to post that there is an argument in favour of recv as opposed to receive, and Thorsten has just provided a nice example of it!

-- Martin Bonner Martin.Bonner@Pitechnology.com Pi Technology, Milton Hall, Ely Road, Milton, Cambridge, CB4 6WZ, ENGLAND Tel: +44 (0)1223 441434