[zeromq-dev] what happens to the bindings with libzmq libzapi ...
Martin Lucina
mato at kotelna.sk
Tue Apr 26 13:30:06 CEST 2011
sustrik at 250bpm.com said:
> On 04/26/2011 01:00 PM, Martin Lucina wrote:
>
> > I would like to request discussion on this and would prefer that zapi is
> > not positioned as "the official high-level C API for ZeroMQ" until/when/if the
> > community agrees that this is a good thing.
>
> I would like to point out that different bindings bindings take liberty
> in adding new functionality / changing the APIs. Also, we have 3 Erlang
> bindings, 2 ruby Bindings, 2 .NET bindings etc.
This is true and is a neccessary consequence of community development,
although I would suspect that in each case there is a single binding that
is preferred and actively developed.
> Given the above, libzapi doesn't reach out in any way.
Correct; except that it is being positioned as the *official* high-level C
binding for ZeroMQ, rather than being positioned as a separate higher level
layer and product in its own right.
Same goes for the guide. It's great work, but I see it becoming the "Guide
to using ZeroMQ with ZAPI" rather than "The 0MQ Guide".
> The problem you are referring to AFAIU is that libzmq's API is *the*
> native API and the fact is not stressed sufficiently.
Well, it didn't need to be stressed at all while there there was a single C
API. Given that the C API is *by definition* the native API, and there can
be only one of those, ZAPI is something else.
> What would you propose to make the fact more clear?
Clearly position ZAPI as a separate product.
-mato
More information about the zeromq-dev
mailing list