Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] Urdl

[Glyn M. <gly...@gm...>]

Hi Matt,

2009/6/26 Matt Trentini <mat...@gm...>

> Hello folks,
>
> Christopher Kohlhoff, primary author and maintainer of the Boost Asio
> library, has recently announced Urdl:
>
>


> There are other pros/cons with the libraries.  Here are some differences:
>
>  o Urdl uses a stream-based approach whereas cpp-netlib uses a
> message and message parser abstraction.
>  o Cpp-netlib requires Boost 1.35 (I think. I'm using it with 1.37).
> Urdl requires 1.38.
>  o Urdl offers flexible deployment options (shared, static or
> header-only). Cpp-netlib is header-only.
>  o Urdl offers HTTPS (which requires OpenSSL)
>  o Urdl provides timeouts
>  o Cpp-netlib appears to be more stable.  Urdl is still very much
> under active development
>  o Urdl's documentation is more complete
>

> Was there any other points that are worth noting?  What else does
> cpp-netlib (or Urdl) do?
>

The first three aren't terribly important differences, the rest are fair and
I think its down to the inertia that this project is currently in.  HTTPS
and timeouts are things that normally we should be able to offer, as soon as
someone gets round to doing it.  The goal of cpp-netlib is to be highly
extensible through it's basic_message template, and I think ultimately we'd
like to support a much wider range of protocols than HTTP, HTTPS and FTP.
As for Urdl, I don't know what Chris Kohlhoff's intentions are for it so its
difficult to say any more on that.


> I guess what I'm raising is where should we focus our efforts?  Should
> we combine the projects, discard one, or continue as-is?  Personally I
> think a bad result would be to have two very similar decent C++
> libraries that have a huge overlap in features...  (An opinion which
> seems to be shared with others on this project given the efforts to
> integrate Pion.)
>

I would say continue as-is.  I'd like to devote more time to cpp-netlib, but
with work and moving I won't be able to just yet.


>
> I intend to contact Chris about what his intentions are with Urdl
> (intending on submitting it to Boost?  Leaving it as an Asio example?)
> but I thought I'd just see what you folks think first...
>

I think its worthing getting in touch with him for sure.  If he intends to
work on something that we're also interested in then none of us wants to see
this effort duplicated.  And since we're all big supporters of Boost.Asio
here we'd definitely be interested in what he has to say.

Glyn