[zeromq-dev] conventions in bindings

Pieter Hintjens ph at imatix.com
Wed Feb 1 12:58:47 CET 2012

On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 12:43 AM, john skaller
<skaller at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

>> In terms of nomenclature, should bindings follow the czmq convention of using Frame to refer to a message part, or Message, following libzmq?

Yes, I'd definitely recommend using the czmq terminology. All words
have multiple meanings, but as long as we are consistent within our
universe, it'll be OK.  "Frame" is the natural term for one message
part since it does actually represent one 0MQ wire level frame.
"Message" is the right term for a collection of 1 or more frames.
These two map cleanly to the semantics we expect to get. 0MQ's API doc
is confusing because it uses "message" for both concepts.

This terminology has evolved over a long time from use in the Guide
and there have been no issues raised with it, so I'd encourage its
adoption. Anything more complex is going to be more, not less,

I'd also recommend updating
http://www.zeromq.org/topics:binding-abstractions to suit.


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list