[nanomsg] Re: Status of nanomsg
- From: Martin Lucina <martin@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Michael Powell <mwpowellhtx@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2013 20:07:57 +0200
Hi Michael,
mwpowellhtx@xxxxxxxxx said:
> So, my question boils down to this: if these are my choices, to ZMQ? or to
> Crossroads I/O (which I take it is pretty much dead)? where do we stand with
> Nanomsq?
Dirkjan already covered most of your questions on the Crossroads I/O list,
but my 2c on your situation:
Basically, ZMQ is ready and production quality now, with an active
community and development going on - I've not followed it for a while so I
can't say what future development is in the pipeline.
Crossroads I/O is more or less deprecated in favour of nanomsg. There's
nothing wrong with using it, the software is more or less stable but most
people are probably just using ZMQ today since that's where the "action"
is.
As for nanomsg, a possible advantage for you is that it is pure C, thus no
dependency on the C++ runtime which may be an issue for embedded devices.
However, it is not production-ready yet.
> Also, I'm interested to contribute a C# .NET adapter (presumably Interop). And
> our 64-million dollar question: cross compile into ArchLinux ARM.
Both ZMQ and Crossroads I/O have production-quality .NET bindings. A .NET
binding for nanomsg is not much work to implement however you would be
following a moving target.
As for cross-compiling, I replied to your question on the zeromq-dev list.
Crossroads I/O works the same. AFAIK no one has tried to cross-compile
nanomsg yet. Feel free to contact me if you want any help in this area.
Cheers,
-mato
Other related posts:
