Xref: utzoo comp.windows.ms.programmer:1764 comp.os.msdos.programmer:4548
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!world!goodearl
From: goodearl@world.std.com (Robert Goodearl)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms.programmer,comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: Asynch Tool
Keywords: Asynch, DOS, Windows
Message-ID: <1991Apr10.143210.15728@world.std.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 14:32:10 GMT
References: <1991Apr9.165214.11003@bellcore.bellcore.com>
Organization: The World @ Software Tool & Die
Lines: 20

In article <1991Apr9.165214.11003@bellcore.bellcore.com> aaron@backyard.bae.bellcore.com (Aaron Akman) writes:
>
>Any experiences with the various asynch libraries--blaise, greenleaf,
>etc?  Both in a windows app and otherwise.  Comparisons?  Opinions?

I used the Greenleaf library in a DOS application a number of years ago.  It
was quite a comprehensive package, though I did find a somewhat sticky bug.
(I think involving flow control.)  Though it took a while to resolve, they
were pretty good at responding to my queries, and got better at that over
time.

If you need really high performance (high baud rates, etc.,) you may want to
write your own driver, or optimize theirs.  For convenient use where
high speed (and this is relative to the system performance of your target
platform) is not at issue -- particularly if they have a working windows
driver -- it seems the preferred way to go.

-- 
Bob Goodearl -- goodearl@world.std.com
Principal Software Engineer, Easel Corporation