Re: [boost] [Interprocess] Named pipe interface proposal

Exactly. It is a low level thing supposed to be wrapped in std::basic_istream/std::basic_ostream for high level stuff. Do not reinvent the wheel, study the design of standard library if you want consistency. 12 авг. 2013 г. 11:12 пользователь "Geoff Shannon" написал:

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 10:09 PM, yuri kilochek

...

wrote:

...

Why not derive from std::streambuf overriding appropriate functions? Isn't it the standard way to deal with custom data streams?

It doesn't seem like it's quite what I'm looking for. For instance this SO question< http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8116541/what-exactly-is-streambuf-how-do-...

...

about streambuf seems to indicate that it's something of an implementation detail, and thus not appropriate for a high-level interface. I think the Boost.Asio buffer class is much more appropriate.

-- Geoff

Nothing is ever easy.

_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost