C++ Streams and the underlying file descriptor

[Kevin Atkinson]

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/