This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: C++ Streams and the underlying file descriptor
- To: Dietmar Kuehl <dietmar dot kuehl at claas-solutions dot de>
- Subject: Re: C++ Streams and the underlying file descriptor
- From: Kevin Atkinson <kevinatk at home dot com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 04:28:06 -0500
- CC: libstdc++ at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <3.0.32.20000117092039.00998ad0@mail.omnilink.net>
Dietmar Kuehl wrote:
>
> Hi,
> At 07:05 PM 1/16/00 -0500, Kevin Atkinson wrote:
> >The reason I ask is because I need to use posix locks in one of my
> >program and I would like to to still be able to use C++ streams however
> >I don't want to unnecessary sacrifice portability.
> To put it differently: I would strongly prefer if libstdc++ classes do not
> include any extensions. Instead, extensions like eg. a POSIX stream and
> a corresponding POSIX stream buffer should be part for a complementary
> library.
But WHY should I have to you a DIFFERENT stream buffer when the current
implementation basically has to be implemented on top of file
descriptors?
--
Kevin Atkinson
kevinatk@home.com
http://metalab.unc.edu/kevina/