[zeromq-dev] zmq_reactor API question

gonzalo diethelm gdiethelm at dcv.cl
Wed Aug 11 22:28:09 CEST 2010

Matt, allow me to reply with a request: could you provide a little more
information on what the use case for zmq_reactor is? I reviewed the
samples on the git repo but I am not sure exactly what your goals are
with the code (at a very high level). Forgive my being obtuse...


Thanks and best regards. 


Gonzalo Diethelm 



From: zeromq-dev-bounces at lists.zeromq.org
[mailto:zeromq-dev-bounces at lists.zeromq.org] On Behalf Of Matt Weinstein
Sent: Wednesday, 11 August, 2010 14:27
To: zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
Subject: [zeromq-dev] zmq_reactor API question


Is the linked list form of zmq_reactor_t too complex? 


The current linked-list form of the zmq_reactor interface was conceived
of to allow easy manipulation of the linkages on the fly, primarily
through policy callbacks.  However, that rationale no longer applies
because policies have been replaced by the IOP format we have today.


I am leaning toward re-writing the interface to zmq_reactor to mirror


          int zmq_reactor_poll (zmq_reactoritem_t *items, int nitems,
long timeout);


We are probably early enough in the usage and evolution of the library
to change this easily.  This will eliminate a lot of structural
complexity without a lot of downside. 


Finally, we could always allow "poll block chaining" in future versions
if this were a necessary feature.


Please let me know what you think?


I'm leaning in favor of this change, so please object strongly if it's


If I don't hear serious objections I will start branching this PDQ.




Thank you,






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20100811/2c9ae076/attachment.htm>

More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list