From: Sebastian Redl (sebastian.redl_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-30 10:54:37
Scott Woods wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeremy Maitin-Shepard" <jbms_at_[hidden]>
>
>> Perhaps you can elaborate on how your ideas about a conceptual framework
>> for interpreting a byte stream as more structured data should affect the
>> interface/design of the I/O library.
>>
>
> Yes. Apologies for loss of context :-)
>
> The short version;
> 1. Drop "Compression Filter and Misc. Filter" from "Binary Transport Layer"
> 2. Rename "Buffer Filter" as just "Buffering"
> 3. Bundle "Endianness" and "Representation" and call it "Network/Host
> Representation"
> 4. Pull the resulting "Network/Host Representation" out of the presented
> layering
> 5. Define other representations such as "ASCII Line", "UTF-8 XML" and
> "Command Line User"
> 6. Allow for representations to be composable, e.g,
> Command Line User<input = keys to basic C++ types,output = basic types to
> UTF 8>
>
Although I think your ideas for an interpretation framework are
interesting, I think you're applying them at the wrong level. For all
its layering, my library concept is still intended (except for the
formatting) as a low-level stream interface. Your framework might build
on top of it, perhaps even modifying the chains as it goes along.
However, I don't think mutilating the structure and generality of the
interface for the sake of such an interpretation scheme is justified.
Sebastian Redl