[zeromq-dev] [otish] "Why ZeroMQ"

[Oliver Smith]

On 7/27/2010 6:32 AM, Andrew Hume wrote:
> the difficulty i see, and had when i started 0mq, is that rather
> than naming inputs and outputs, 0mq is naming protocol patterns
> (that is how nodes cooperate), and the naming conventions
> for nodes and the connections are fairly specific to each pattern.
> and for me, that missing piece of documentation was the critical
> one to me; this is the document that lists several to many common
> patterns of data flow, and for each pattern, identifies each type of
> node in the pattern, the channels involved, and how each node
> implements their channels in 0mq.
When I initially got the link to the ZeroMQ introduction from a 
colleague, that was pretty much what almost turned me away.

Hence why I think - at least eventually - 'Grand Titles' should co-exist 
with the common-use short names.

#define ZMQ_PIPELINE_OUTSOCKET 8
#define ZMQ_PIPELINE_INSOCKET 7
#define ZMQ_UPSTREAM ZMQ_PIPELINE_INSOCKET
#define ZMQ_DOWNSTREAM ZMQ_PIPELINE_OUTSOCKET

namespace zmq
{
   namespace pipeline
   {
     //! Documentation on the pipeline pattern
     //! goes here for autodoc generation.
     enum
     {
       insocket = 7,  //!< send()ing end of a pipeline connection
       outsocket = 8 //!< recv()ing end of a pipeline connection
     };
   }
};