From: Scott Woods (scottw_at_[hidden])
Date: 2005-08-03 21:33:08
Pardon. An error in that last message.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Woods" <scottw_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost_at_[hidden]>
> The above paragrah is about the long term significance of non-blocking vs
> blocking. I believe you are also facing the issue of library
> (de-)composition;
> if you ultimately want to provide both a blocking and non-blocking API it
> is less difficult to imagine a non-blocking API over a blocking API than
the
> other way around.
Should be;
"if you ultimately want to provide both a blocking and non-blocking API it
is less difficult to imagine a blocking API over a non-blocking API than the
other way around."