[zeromq-dev] Renaming ZMQ_RECONNECT_IVL_MAX in 3.0

[Gregg Irwin]

>> Hmm, industry practice is short option names ("SNDBUF"), so
>> ZMQ_RECONNECT and ZMQ_RECONNECT_MAX would work better.

MS> What do others think? Is shortening the option names worth of it? There
MS> are couple of other long names out there, e.g. ZMQ_RECOVERY_IVL. Or even
MS> ZMQ_SUBSCRIBE and ZMQ_UNSUBSCRIBE...

If it's not used often, longer and more descriptive is better. I don't
think adding a few letters makes it too long, and they do add some
meaning. I think TIME might be more meaningful than IVL. I know what
IVL means now, but it didn't have instant meaning to me when I first
saw it. 

-- Gregg