Why is MaNGOS using ACE?

[Guest]

I was just googling around and read some abot Boost, and it seems like most people like both Boost and "POCO" more then ace in general. They say its hard to spawn threads in ACE and its code is ugly because of support for old compilers etc...

So when mangos introduced ACE (When was this by the way) why did they pick just ACE? Oh yeah i read someone said ACE is nr.uno on Networking, might that be it?

[VladimirMangos]

boost nice but main part required from generic library in mangos case is fast sockets framework.

I use for one from personal projects boost sockets version but i not sure that boost ASIO is good case for MMO server.

In fact as i understand asio mostly same by functionality as dropped used before ACE socket libary.

From other side i can't say that i am expert in boost asio usage. I just use it in one project and it work. No performance testing and etc.

[Kaiosown]

Poco only support Linux, we can't use it in MaNGOS. Boost is fast i must admit but i prefer ACE for the stability

[skynz_]

Poco only support Linux, we can't use it in MaNGOS. Boost is fast i must admit but i prefer ACE for the stability

http://pocoproject.org/features.html

[TeacherDon_]

ACE is the primary reason I can't compile MaNGOS in Windows with anything other than Visual Studio. (MinGW, Cygwin, Code::Blocks, Eclipse)

What features of ACE is MaNGOS using? I know it's using the networking sockets, and I suspect it's using thread, but anything else?

[lillecarl]

Threads and networking. Nothing else what i have seen. And yeah all uint32 are reffering to ace in some way ^^,

[Unkle Nuke]

Even though I am a Windows user, I have always hated that their APIs are universally incompatible with everything else. It makes using anything other than Visual Studio for Windows development painfully difficult and trying to compile code designed for VS with open source alternatives is impossible.

There is a certain irony in an open source project requiring closed source tools on the Windows side. At least VS is free, so long as you're content with the crippleware version.

There is a MaNGOS University topic, in the Community Cafe, where support for other C++ compilers is discussed. MinGW, with or without Code::Blocks is of particular interest to the participants. If anyone has ideas, please feel free to jump right in and post!

[lillecarl]

Even though I am a Windows user, I have always hated that their APIs are universally incompatible with everything else. It makes using anything other than Visual Studio for Windows development painfully difficult and trying to compile code designed for VS with open source alternatives is impossible.

There is a certain irony in an open source project requiring closed source tools on the Windows side. At least VS is free, so long as you're content with the crippleware version.

There is a MaNGOS University topic, in the Community Cafe, where support for other C++ compilers is discussed. MinGW, with or without Code::Blocks is of particular interest to the participants. If anyone has ideas, please feel free to jump right in and post!

When this is supported, im going to explode, fly trough the roof and just be so damn happy, i am TIRED of MSVSC++, It is too unstable ;D And we could also possible learn by code::blocks