RE: [Beepcore-c-users] State of the BEEP

[Andy D. <de...@oo...>]

> So my question is are these signs of a mature, bug-free, 
> robust software project, or one that's been mostly abandoned? 
>  Are folks using beep and beepcore-c?  How well used and 
> widely deployed are these technologies?

I think BEEP is well-defined and I used a slight variation (pure XML
wrappers) for the IBVA brainwave protocols transmitting from c++ servers
on PocketPC, Windows and OSX to a variety of clients including Python,
Flash and RealBasic.

I didn't use beepcore-c because I perceived it as having deep bugs (a
year ago) in subtle timing issues and I would have had to hack it anyway
to go pure XML (something driven by an early architectural decision to
talk to Flash).

Difficulties with the "out of the box" experience trying to compile
beepcre-c at that time with Visual Studio (both for Windows and
PocketPC) also discouraged me.

I have probably spent enough time debugging my own stack that I would
have been equally well-off polishing beepcore-c.

I didn't use RoadRunner because of licensing issues and perceived
difficulty in getting the various packages working on PocketPC.