[nanomsg] Re: semantic of PAIR sockets...?
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 12:24:15 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 26/03/14 09:30, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> Actually, I had one colleague who investigated ZeroMQ for a use
> case ask me about the lack of something PAIR-like. His point was
> mostly that it seemed silly that ZeroMQ couldn't do the simplest
> thing you could possibly want to do with sockets. He got me
> thinking that the PAIR pattern is actually quite useful as a
> gateway drug to using more of nanomsg, as the easiest way to
> replace a bare socket with nanomsg and get some of the value of
> communicating in messages etc.
In fact, I believe there is a subset of users that come to
nanomsg/ZeroMQ for message delimitation on top of TCP...
Why I wouldn't like to scare them away completely, on the other hand
it's clear that message delimitation is not the primary goal of the
project.
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTMrjfAAoJENTpVjxCNN9Y0mUH/Rj+++Qfm8fplFLCEgHn3i15
x8ixsVPII2xBw0PfV3ohOgqqkgAaBRAlj0A1iKfoNoHE0ipxEtcxPm69S6jNg0P4
HXkIIltgHF39Gk8kWxkEURwZ8VvviTmXFozVVYZkL2G/ZJU92yQ9KMjJoicANhA0
aQhHdpiet4czZ3WFk+rTEAW6CkTMvs5qSxjR0kr3GVoBfOMiW5gIiR9xjXRk+TiZ
set7pc98z5YZ4H8cNbodxi6wtmEAyBnffkE51cWplSrBYvGt5GYiKL4mrlNavTIf
1cUjKduwn/KTB8v3DNGQWo42r/7gMX//TDJrY3+XRGo2C1R5XJF4vTfgOTKL1m0=
=RarN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
