[zeromq-dev] Requesting suggestions for getsockopt() in Java

[Pieter Hintjens]

On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 4:06 PM, gonzalo diethelm <gdiethelm at dcv.cl> wrote:

> 3. Finally, the 0MQ documentation sometimes uses int64_t and sometimes
> uint64_t for several of the socket options, even mixing the two types
> for a given option when setting or getting it. Is this on purpose?

As far as I can tell, the only two options that are correctly
documented are ZMQ_SNDBUF and ZMQ_RCVBUF.  All the others are
backwards from the code.

This is what I've summarised from the source code (options.cpp):

uint64_t

ZMQ_HWM - wrong in getsockopt doc, wrong in setsockopt doc
ZMQ_AFFINITY - wrong in getsockopt doc, wrong in setsockopt doc
ZMQ_SNDBUF - correctly documented
ZMQ_RCVBUF - correctly documented

int64_t

ZMQ_SWAP - not documented in getsockopt doc
ZMQ_RATE - wrong in getsockopt doc, wrong in setsockopt doc
ZMQ_RECOVERY_IVL - wrong in getsockopt doc, wrong in setsockopt doc
ZMQ_MCAST_LOOP - wrong in getsockopt doc, wrong in setsockopt doc

-Pieter